8 1 min 12 yrs

All you have to do is watch this and then consider WHY the West allows this build-up to continue when it is clear what the aim is – a nuclear Iran capable of wiping Israel off the face of the Earth. Note the centrality of the Koran to the process and the chanting of Allah Akhbar amongst “the Parliamentarians..”. Now, where I have heard Allah Akhbar chanted before?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. When did Iran last start a war against anywhere? She has not done so in modern times. In fact, a non-nuclear state, she has lived for some years under the world’s only extant threat of a nuclear strike by any state against any other, and now lives under both of the world’s two such threats.

    As a Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton promised to nuke Iran, which has not started a war in modern times, if so instructed by her campaign backers, the viciously misogynistic, Jew-hating, Shia-hating, Wahhabi-exporting Gulf monarchs. Now she is Secretary of State, and lo and behold, a "weapons shield" is being sited in those states, one of which, though it has a Sunni ruling house, has a Shi’ite majority population. Not only did Chilcot allow Blair to get away with repeated references to 9/11, entirely unconnected to Iraq, but Blair also referred to Iran no fewer than 58 times. What advance intelligence had been given to this rancid old Clinton bag-carrier and wannabe?

    It is amazing how many on the Right are still forgiving of Blair over his wars, seeing them as the only good things that he ever did and as somehow not of a piece with the rest of his record. Blair liked wars because they cost taxpayers vast sums of money. You might argue that the taxpayers should simply have been able to keep that money. Or you might argue that it should have been spent on fighting want, ignorance, ill health, idleness and squalor. But either way, you cannot argue for spending it on wars instead, if at all avoidable.

    Blair liked wars because they are morally and socially disruptive. Everything to do with the Swinging Sixties started during the War. Just ask anyone of that generation. My late father always made that point in the Eighties, when Margaret Thatcher was on about the Sixties: she was right, but it really all went back to the War, when there was an epidemic of venereal disease, when London’s and other cities’ parks were turned on VE Night into giant outdoor orgies worthy of (indeed, surpassing) anything to come in the summer of 1968, and so much else besides.

    Blair liked wars because he believed in making the world anew to some academic blueprint, or in his case to its vulgarisation for consumption by the uncultured likes of him. And Blair liked wars because they create new enemies and entrench or embitter old ones, thus creating future threats, which lead to further expensive, morally and socially disruptive, make-the-world-anew wars.

    Sometimes a war is inescapable, such as when our territory is invaded. But we are neither fighting nor facing any such war today. Nor were we at any point in Tony Blair’s Premiership. Indeed, since one trusts that you would not accept the IRA view of "a war between Britain and Ireland", we have not been since 1982.

  2. It’s nuthink David. Brush it off. Oh and while we’re at it we should withdraw from Afghanistan, let Pakistan become overun, stand back and watch this lot all join the dots, fill the dusty voids and form a giant circle jerk with big fat nuclear weapons in the middle. With God on their side. Allahu Akbar. No doubt Saddams WMD will resurface in the region from whence they were hidden and tadaaa! we can all sleep safely in our beds. Heh.

  3. Things that never existed in the first place are not going to "turn up", Alison. And so successfully have we "liberated" Afghanistan, that battered wives are setting fire to themselves in order to escape their pitiful existences. If they happen to belong to those ethnic groups that are Shi’ite, then they can now be raped within marriage without any crime being committed. Farmers are selling their daughters in order to pay off their debts to the opium barons whom we have supposedly cleared out. And the "Taliban" are being put, Sinn Fein-like, on the payroll, even though Sinn Fein is an identifiable organisation and subculture, whereas the "Taliban" are simply Pashtun nationalists who are ultraconservative in their Islam, and have no existence apart from the Pashtun as a whole.

    The 9/11 attacks actually came from Saudi Arabia, on which Bush was and is financially dependent, which owns so much of the American economy that the CIA guards its embasssy as if it were an American government building, on whose (along with Kuwait’s or the UAE’s) instructions Clinton promised to nuke Iran if she became President, and where part of this new missile programme is located. Please note that it was the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia that was explicitly cited by the 9/11 attackers. Bush, proving that no one is all bad, withdrew them, and there has since been no further attack on America soil. But now, the Americans are back to square one, for the defence of half a dozen countries other than their own, all either heavily militarisied in one case or fabulously rich in the others. Why don’t those countries defend themselves?

    Oh, well, clearly it is now all hands on deck against Iran. After all, we can’t have more women than men at university, or reserved parliamentary seats for Christians and Jews, or indeed elections at all. All very un-Saudi…

    If this is the TUV’s foreign policy line, then it will alienate key potential palecon allies on the mainland, from UKIP to Peter Hitchens. They won’t, by the way, like the inclusion of Loyalist paramilitary apologists, either.

  4. On a more positive note I am kinda hoping that next week’s Feb 11 showdown might mark the beginning of the end for the Ahmadinejad government. And Id like to wish our finest and bravest best of luck right now as they start one of the biggest offensives undertaken since 2001. They believe in what they are doing as do I.

  5. Headbanger’s assurance that they are prepared to accept uranian-enrichment abroad will turn out to be yet another lie, designed to divide the west and buy more time for the scientists to get the bomb. They were supposed to agree to this over a year ago, then six months ago, then two months ago. Each deadline was missed, without adverse consequences for this despotic, murdering, rapist regime.

    The pattern has been clear for several years – lie, prevaricate, delay, buy time. And so far it has worked a treat.

Comments are closed.