IMPORTANT: Iran suicide bombers ‘ready to hit Britain’

[lala_rawraw]

Iran suicide bombers ‘ready to hit Britain’
Marie Colvin, Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter

IRAN has formed battalions of suicide bombers to strike at British and American targets if the nation’s nuclear sites are attacked. According to Iranian officials, 40,000 trained suicide bombers are ready for action.

<snip>

One of the leaked reports, dating from February this year, confirms that President George W Bush is preparing to strike Iran. “If the problem is not resolved in some way, he intends to act before leaving office because it would be ‘unfair’ to leave the task of destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities to a new president,” the document says.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2136638,00.html

[Clarkie1]

1. And yet he believes it fair to leave Iraq to the next president?

What kind of logic do these people follow?

Edit: and since when was the best course American foreign policy determined by what is "fair" to the next president?

[Dunvegan]

2. And why shouldn't we expect action on US soil, also?

Both "Coalition" countries are at grave risk poking a stick at Iran.

We're threatening to bomb them there, so we can fight them here.

[WilliamPitt]

3. Sounds like Khadafy in the '80s.

Talked about thousands of suicide bomber volunteers that would be unleashed if Reagan attacked Tripoli.

Reagan attacked Tripoli, killed Khadafy's kid and blew his wife's leg off. No suicide brigades were forthcoming.

Just sayin'. Times are different now, to be sure. The "volunteers" seem more...um...committed now.

[lala_rawraw]

11. i would agree... but this also maybe

a way for the UK to distance themselves from the Bush administration. hard to tell what is going on because everything depends on the sources. Smith is a fantastic reporter, yet there are two others on the byline, so not sure. the memo is real, that i know. but the bombing stuff i don't know anything about at all.

[robertpaulsen]

14. Distance themselves from the Bush administration?

I guess that goes hand in hand with this story:

Blair refuses to back Iran strike
BRIAN BRADY WESTMINSTER EDITOR

TONY Blair has told George Bush that Britain cannot offer military support to any strike on Iran, regardless of whether the move wins the backing of the international community, government sources claimed yesterday.

Amid increasing tension over Tehran's attempts to develop a military nuclear capacity, the Prime Minister has laid bare the limits of his support for President Bush, who is believed to be considering an assault on Iran, Foreign Office sources revealed.

snip

In a declaration aimed at America's allies as much as Iran, Rice claimed the Security Council's handling of the Iranian nuclear issue would be a test of the international community's credibility. "If the UN Security Council says: 'You must do these things and we'll assess in 30 days,' and Iran has not only not done those things, but has taken steps that are exactly the opposite of those that are demanded, then the Security Council is going to have to act."

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=577092006

Found this link at Raw Story, so thanks. Looks like this term's "Coalition of the Willing" is US, Israel, and that's it. My guess is Blair's political survival depends on keeping his distance militarily. Funny last paragraph though, US once again blathering about the "international community's credibility". Who is Rice kidding?

[Jeffersons Ghost]

4. they're about to hit IRAN too

It's suicide for humanity on a grand scale to drop the BOMB!

[Imagevision]

5. So if Bombs start going off within the US. we should accept it as

well we're at war with Iran and things happen when we're at war?? Is this the Bush-Repug logic for pre-empting Iran??

[leftchick]

6. damn!

:scared:

<snip>

The NCRI is the political wing of the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq, which is deemed a terrorist organisation in Britain and America. However, much of its information is considered to be “absolutely credible” by western intelligence sources after Jafarzadeh revealed the existence of the Natanz plant in 2002

[pinto]

7. Alireza Jafarzadeh.....an Iranian Chalabi?

I haven't a clue, but it all grows so convoluted and incestuous...

<snip from the article>

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a former spokesman for National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), an opposition group, said a secret, parallel military programme was under way. According to sources inside Iran, the Revolutionary Guards were constructing underground sites that could be activated if Iran’s known nuclear facilities were destroyed.

The NCRI is the political wing of the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq, which is deemed a terrorist organisation in Britain and America. However, much of its information is considered to be “absolutely credible” by western intelligence sources after Jafarzadeh revealed the existence of the Natanz plant in 2002.

Within the past year, 14 large and several smaller projects have been created, according to Jafarzadeh. Several are designed to be nuclear factories; others are for the storage of weapons, he claimed

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2136638,00.html

Mr. Jafarzadeh is now a consultant and Fox News analyst....

Alireza Jafarzadeh, Founder and President of Strategic Policy Consulting Inc

SPC Inc. provides speakers for expert testimony at congressional hearings and briefings; presentations at international economical seminars and conferences as well as lectures at universities and academic institutions.


These presentations and testimonies include the following subjects:


- Islamic fundamentalism and its threat to world peace

- Iranian regime’s role in Iraqi affairs

- Iran’s nuclear weapons program

- Iran’s ambitious missile program

- Iran’s terror network

- Iran’s foreign policy

- Iran’s internal situation

- Policies, composition and nature of the ruling religious theocrats

- Student movement in Iran

- Iranian opposition groups

- Human rights situation

- Plight of women in Iran

http://www.spconsulting.us/index.htm

the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq (MEK):

http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/mek.htm

[stop the bleeding]

8. Important

is an understatement,


When are these f*cktards running the country gonna get it?:argh:

[SOS]

9. Background from Richard Clarke in NYT op-ed (4/16/06)

"American frustrations with Iran were growing, and in early 1996 the House speaker, Newt Gingrich, publicly called for the overthrow of the Iranian government. He and the C.I.A. put together an $18 million package to undertake it.

The Iranian legislature responded with a $20 million initiative for its intelligence organizations to counter American influence in the region. Iranian agents began casing American embassies and other targets around the world. In June 1996, the Qods Force, the covert-action arm of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, arranged the bombing of an apartment building used by our Air Force in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 Americans.

At that point, the Clinton administration and the Pentagon considered a bombing campaign. But after long debate, the highest levels of the military could not forecast a way in which things would end favorably for the United States.

While the full scope of what America did do remains classified, published reports suggest that the United States responded with a chilling threat to the Tehran government and conducted a global operation that immobilized Iran's intelligence service. Iranian terrorism against the United States ceased."

Bombs That Would Backfire
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/opinion/16clarke.html

[leesa]

10. Elizabeth Cheney? Come on...how many times are people gonna fall for this

shit? Who does this benefit, folks? Has the UK been a bit reluctant to go to war for the Bush Crime Family?

[lala_rawraw]

12. more from

http://www.spiegel.de/

boy oh boy, we are very much screwed.

[TheBaldyMan]

13. I'm not worried, I've lived through bombing campaigns by the IRA

and I'm damned if I'm going to start panicking because someone has raised the spectre of a bogey-man.

40,000 trained suicide bombers - my arse.