Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Greenspan's Successor | Main | Annoying Microsoft »

October 6, 2005

U.S. Concerns Over Iran military's Nuclear Role And The 'Develfish Of Islamofascism'

Topics: Iran

And there are many good reasons for both the U.S(administration) and all of 'US' to have concerns over the Iran military's nuclear role!

Iran flag burning.bmp
[Iranian religious students, burn the likeness of U.S. and British flags to support Iran's nuclear program last Tuesday(AP).]

The Koran cannot be compromised, repudiated piecemeal, or "modified" so that it posed no threat to the West. It cannot be "secularized" without destroying Islam. Islam can no more be "perverted" or "hijacked" than can Nazism, Fascism, or Japanese Bushido. Islamic clerics know this, as well as rank-and-file Muslims, which is why they are largely silent on the matter of terrorism, with the exception of an occasional equivocating expression of public regret for the bombings.

The most serious problem is that the current conflict is being treated as a mere "war against terrorism." It has devolved into a mere cops-and-robbers manhunt for terrorists and suspected terrorists and their cells. It may as well be put on a par with a campaign to stamp out "violent bank robberies." - Edward Kline, "The Devilfish of Islamofascism."

Although we're long overdue to engage the "Devilfish of Islamofascism" being pushed by Iran, along with the development of it's nuclear weapons program (alright - the alleged nuclear weapons program that does exist and we'd better damned well accept that as fact), apparently the administration is still at the "worrying stage" when we ought to be taking on the "Devilfish" by cutting off it's head instead of playing around with it's tentacles. And to the short list of "Devilfish heads" that need to be severed, we must be sure to include as part of the "octopus head of Islamofascism (our Devilfish) - Syria, Saudi Arabia, and to a lesser degree, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

That, however, is not what's on the administration's agenda.

The Bush administration yesterday expressed concern about the role of Iran's military in the country's nuclear programs, saying it raised fresh fears that Tehran is seeking nuclear weapons.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the U.S. government shares worries expressed by U.N. nonproliferation experts about the control of Iran's nuclear programs, which the Islamic regime insists are intended solely for civilian energy uses.

"It stands to reason that the one logical conclusion of a military involvement in a nuclear program is they are trying to build a nuclear weapon," Mr. McCormack said in response to a report in yesterday's editions of The Washington Times. "And that has been our concern for some time."

The board of governors of the Vienna, Austria-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N.'s main nonproliferation agency, concluded last month that Iran had violated past pledges to come clean about its nuclear programs and said the issue could be turned over to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.
If the issue being turned over to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions is our big gun to intimidate Iran into folding up it's "nuclear ambitions tent" and going home peacefully and quietly into the night, we're in VERY BIG trouble.

When is the administration (and also the Left) going to recognize that we are ALREADY at war with Iran AND it's ambition to spread Islamofascism?

As Edward Cline wrote in his August 16, 2005 piece in Capital Magazine, "The Devilfish of Islamofascism," in which he referenced Victor Hugo's "Toilers of the Sea,":

The advocates and promulgators of Islamofascism, like the devilfish in Hugo's "Toilers of the Sea," stupefy their prey, and wait, then strike. Missing from the real life dilemma is a Gilliatt. President Bush is not one, nor is Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. They attack the tentacles but, in the name of tolerance, refuse to cut off the head.
Kline refered to "a passage our leaders ought to be made to read and learn from if they wish to successfully prosecute the "war against terrorism."":
"The devilfish is cunning. It first tries to stupefy its prey. It seizes, then waits as long as it can.

Gilliatt held his knife. The suction increased.

All at once the creature detached its sixth tentacle from the rock, launched it at him, and attempted to seize his left arm....At the same time, it thrust its head forward swiftly....

But Gilliatt was on his guard. Being watched, he watched.

Gilliatt plunged the point of his knife into the flat, viscous mass, and with a twisting movement similar to the flourish of a whip, describing a circle around the two eyes, he tore out the head as one wrenches out a tooth.

It was finished. The whole creature dropped....The four hundred suckers simultaneously released their hold of the rock and the man.

This rag sank to the bottom."

In what I consider to be extremely important reading for our leaders and the public, Kane points to what I believe to be some very important facts that our politically correct media and political leaders appear to disregard:
As many contributors to this publication(Capitalism Magazine)have pointed out, most recently and succinctly by Dr. Edwin Locke and Alex Epstein in their penetrating "The Terrorists' Motivation: Islam," the trouble is not that killers have "hijacked a peaceful religion." The trouble is that Islam is not, in its fundamental tenets (if its virulent injunctions can be called "principles"), a "peaceful" religion.

It is a manifesto for the conquest and destruction of all Western civilization and the establishment of a global anti-man, anti-mind theocracy.

It pursues this goal, it should be apparent by now, by employing two methods:

(1.) with immediate, violent action, such as indiscriminate bombings; and (2.) by an osmotic process of invading a Western country with a fifth column that works to alter Western laws to tolerate its presence, while at the same time preaching the abandonment of those laws in favor of law based on an intolerant Koran.

While some still ask - "what is the motivation of the terrorists," and commentators are still eager to offer a "bevy of pseudo-explanations like poverty, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, etc., what is ignored is the motivation that the terrorists themselves openly proclaim: Islam.

AS Edward Cline so clearly points out, "The octopus head of Islamofascism is: Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. To a lesser extent, one must include Pakistan and even Afghanistan, since the Taliban are apparently still active in both those countries and the heads of those countries are impotent or unwilling to eradicate it. Most of the madrasses in Pakistan are subsidized by Saudi Arabia, are a chief source of suicide bombers." Kline doesn't advocate for "expending lives and fortune to establish a "democratic" government" in Iraq, and believes that we should have moved on to Syria or Iran and let the Iraqis sort out what to do next. Although I personally am in favor of "finishing up the job in Iraq" because some of both the Sunni and especially the Shi'ite population is part and parcel a component of Iran and Syria's network of terrorism, I do agree with Kline that we are under no moral obligation to help anyone discover the benefits of Western institutions, not at the price of sacrificing American lives, American wealth, and American liberties, which is what is occurring now. However, while I don't agree with his abandoning Iraq, I do believe that it's high time to fish or cut bait, and get on with a REAL war on terrorism, and that means going after Iran and it's Islamic cohorts, the devilfish of Islamofascism, like a hungry mad dog after a bone (and make that a pork bone).

Posted by Richard at October 6, 2005 3:06 PM

Articles Related to Iran: