The Evil Has Landed
This piece of trash needs to be arrested (Or worse) Take your wreath and shove it!
And what the hell is Columbia University thinking? Have these people forgotten he held our American Embassy Personell Hostage for 444 Days? And is aiding in the killing of our Troops in Iraq by supplying the enemy with High Tech IED'S? This is so wrong so very wrong. Yank the Security Detail!!!!
Move the UN to Guantanamo Bay!!
And what the hell is Columbia University thinking? Have these people forgotten he held our American Embassy Personell Hostage for 444 Days? And is aiding in the killing of our Troops in Iraq by supplying the enemy with High Tech IED'S? This is so wrong so very wrong. Yank the Security Detail!!!!
Move the UN to Guantanamo Bay!!
Labels: Akmenutjob, Iran, Terrorists
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 8:31 AM
31 Comments:
Arrest Akmenutjob As Soon As He Lands!!"
---------------------------------
We can dream can't we marie.
Diplomatic Immunity is the pits! Actually sending the UN to Gitmo would be to good for them!
Achmahitlerjad is the UN's pet dictator and he will get the grand reception from the general assembly.
I would hope that our ambassador would not attend his speech.
Personally I think he should be able to go to ground zero but not to lay a wreath but to allow those who would block his trip there a free hand in handling the moron as he deserves.
The police should just back off and let we Americans take the dictator into our care as he walks to the sight and let free public justice take its course!
DD,
YES!~!
(Or Worse)
I hope seriously someone somewhere in Akmanutjob's range lobbs something at that SOB!!
Ken,
Well we wouldnt have to put up with him or Chavez on the usual American soil and in GITMO they would still be on American soil but just not in America so to speak.
Diplomatic Imunity is something that has seriously got to be looked into.
Truthfully? I dont want that son of a bitch anywhere near ground zero where he can silently praise what Usama accomplished!
But NO Secret Service detail for this asshole, I think seriously, turn him loose in New York really, and see how far he gets with NO security detail!!
Why should we have to take this bullshit?
Marie...please quit holding back. Let us know how you really feel.
Word,
If I really let loose I would probably have the Secret Service at my door AGAIN!!
One time I sent the Secret Service a copy of a post I found on a website called http://www.crisis911.com or something like that years ago and they mistook it for ME wanting to kill the President and showed up at MY WORK!!
Took me damn near an hour to convince them it wasnt me that wanted the President dead but a website, gave them all the info, they still scanned my eyeballs and then left and went about thier business I suppose.
That was an unpleasnt experience to say the least.
That's why I am so careful what I say sometimes.
However I think they have given up on me, and moved on to more important stuff.
But that doesnt distract me from wanting the main terrorist DEAD!
Let 'em show up again, this time we will hash it out!!!
However I think they have given up on me, and moved on to more important stuff.
Oh, no....we're still watching you very carefully under the provisions allotted by an NSA surveillance program sooooo secretive, that even the NYTimes has yet to blow the lid on it.
*Ulp* Did I just blow my cover???
J/K
Lets hope that my fellow New Yorkers will give him the HELL he deserves.
I know how you feel, Marie. We also know that if the UN were in Iran, President Bush wouldn't be allowed to speak there. Can you even imagine him being invited into a college there to speak to the students? This is something out of a really, really bad dream!
LOL Word,
Your cover is blown :-)
DD,
I forgot you live in NY, you must be mad as hell.
Gayle,
This does seem like a really bad dream doesnt it?
Marie said...Took me damn near an hour to convince them it wasnt me that wanted the President dead but a website, gave them all the info, they still scanned my eyeballs and then left and went about thier business I suppose.
You're killing me here girl. I know it wasn't funny at the time that it happened to you but you got me in stiches with your description of what happened. You're about the very last person I'd worry about harming our Prez, but achmanutjob has plenty to worry about
Jenn,
It so was NOT funny at the time, I thought I was going to be arrested.
Looking back at it now I can laugh.
Fortunately for me that day I was wearing my "Dont Mess With America" T-Shirt, and my "Enduring Freedom" Pin, and a Yellow Ribbon Pin for the Troops, and my son was in the Army on the Iraq/Kuwait border.
I had to explain everything about that website I was on and describe the letter I sent to the Secret Service. Actually I copied and pasted a post off that crazy website and sent it to the Secret Service with the title "You guys need to see this".
Before they left they said they were going to take my picture and I didnt know at the time I could have said NO (I was a nervous wreck) and it didnt really seem like a camera because I saw several green flashes instead of a white flash, and I even asked "Did you just scan my eyeballs"? And they never answered.
I am saying, the Secret Service does NOT mess around.
And what I found even more funny than this mess, my neighbor up the block from me shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing and Clinton had come to town to attend a church service for the victims, and his motorcade was heading down the highway, this neighbor was drunk as hell and cut into Clinton's motorcade, he DID get arrested and the Secret Service had been watching him for months after that LOL.
Both on the same block? LOL
I can imagine what the Secret Service was thinking.
The Iranian Leader and the Iranian people are two different entities.
Here's what the Iranian people expressed to America after 9/11:
http://www.iranian.com/memory.html
Also, after 9/11 Iran OFFICIALLY condemned the terrorist attack wanted to help America find the perpetrators. Your Vice President essentially told them to stuff it. Nice. We could have used the non-Arab Iranians in the fight against terrorism, instead we called them the Axis of Evil and alienated a country that could have been helpful. In the past, we've worked with strong-arm dictators for our self interests.
Marcos, Pinochet, Noriega are three who come to mind. Why we turned our backs on Iran when the leadership at the time extended a sign of cooperation, I'll never know.
But I can guess.
September 21, 2001
TEHRAN
Iran Softens Tone Against the United States
By NAZILA FATHI
TEHRAN, Sept. 20 — Iran is not normally given to sympathizing with the United States, but last week's terror attacks have drawn rare public condolences and a pledge to join an international effort to root out terrorism.
Both the reformist camp around President Mohammad Khatami and the more conservative clerics behind the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, have softened their tone toward the United States while warning against Western overreaction.
Last week, for the first time since the 1979 Islamic revolution, there were no chants of "death to America" at weekly Friday prayers around the country, which are controlled by the conservatives.
In a telephone conversation today with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain — the second in two days, and just before Mr. Blair traveled to the United States — President Khatami stressed that regional concerns and realities must be understood.
"A tragedy must not be answered with another tragedy and innocent people in Afghanistan, or any other place, must not be attacked or hurt," Iranian news media quoted Mr. Khatami as telling Mr. Blair. According to Iranian news media, the British prime minister wrote to Mr. Khatami earlier this week seeking Iran's cooperation in preventing a clash between the West and the Muslim world.
[The United States has sent Iran a message responding to what officials viewed as Tehran's "positive statements" since last week's attacks, American officials quoted by Reuters news agency said.]
The United States and Iran severed relations in 1979 when Iranians took American diplomats hostage in their embassy in Tehran. Britain resumed full diplomatic ties in 1998.
On Tuesday, Ayatollah Khamenei, in his first public remarks on last week's attacks, markedly failed to brand the United States an enemy.
"Islam condemns the massacre of defenseless people, whether Muslim or Christian or others, anywhere and by any means," he said, adding pointedly: "And so Iran condemns any attack on Afghanistan that may lead to another human tragedy."
Despite the bitter enmity Iran's Islamic rulers feel for the Taliban mullahs who rule Afghanistan, there is no question of volunteering territory or facilities to the United States for an attack, said Hamidreza Assefi, spokesman of the foreign ministry.
"We are worried about and are against a military strike," Mr. Assefi said. "It will cause instability in the region, and more refugees come toward our borders."
Iran almost went to war with Afghanistan three years ago after the Taliban killed 10 Iranian diplomats and a journalist when fighters seized the Iranian consulate in the northern Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif. Iran sent extra troops to the border but did not invade and is still waiting for the Taliban to meet its demands to hand over those suspected of killing the Iranians.
Now, increasing numbers of refugees pouring out of Afghanistan, which is parched by drought and has experienced 22 years of war, have strained the economy of a country which already faces high unemployment and the restiveness of an overwhelmingly young population.
Iran has 1.4 million Afghan refugees, most of them in the far east of the country, and announced last Friday — three days after the terror attacks on the United States and talk of retaliation against the Taliban who harbor Osama bin Laden — that it was sealing its 560-mile border. Particularly in southern areas, however, that border is hard to control.
On Tuesday, more than than 3,000 mostly young people held a candlelight vigil in Tehran for the victims of the terror attacks, closely watched by security forces.
One reformist member of Parliament, Ahmad Borghani, even went to the United States interest section at the Swiss Embassy on Tuesday with a wreath of white flowers to sign the memorial book in sympathy with the family's of the victims.
"This tragedy has brought the two countries closer," he said. "But the United States must not expect Iran to cooperate in a military attack — considering our past relations."
What a wasted opportunity for America.
Oh Joanne Please!!
As I recall the Iranians were the first ones that took the streets the same day we were attacked along with the Palestinians chanting "Death To America"!!
Either way it wasnt the people of Iran that was making such a petty cheap speach at Columbia but rather a Terrorist representing the people of Iran most of whom probably never even saw ANY of this.
Boo Hoo cry me a river about the Iranian Dictator Terrorist son of a bitch who is helping kill our Troops in his proxi war with America through Al-Qeada Insurgents in Iraq.
That bastard was also one of the hostage takers back in 1979 and held our hostages for 444 days!
He harbors Bin Laden's son, and probably knows right where Bin Laden himself is.
A missed opportunity for America? Hell NO!
Excellent response, Marie! Kudos! :)
Joanne I am suprised, Iran started this whole war with the United States and when they came out and said they wanted to help hmmmm, ever heard of crocodile tears? They put on the face of "oh that's a shame" as they danced and high fived each other behind closed doors.
It was then as it is now a fight to the death and no amount of feigned sympathy by a government that terrorizes it's own people is ever going to change that.
Islam is as it has always been "the problem" since it's incidious and problematic inception. They cannot get along with any of their neighbors whether they be Bhuddists, Hindu, Christian or Jew.
Best thing we could have done was to let Ahmadinejad speak at Columbia.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
WASHINGTON NEWS
Ahmadinejad Remarks Meet With Scorn, Laughter
Without firing a shot or dropping a bomb, Ahmadinejad's followers are all dying from embarrassment.
He was exposed as the jerk that he is. What better way to defang him than to let him make an ass of himself with his own words.
I love freedom of speech and letting two-bit dictators crash and burn by their own stupidities.
"Have these people forgotten he held our American Embassy Personell Hostage for 444 Days?"
- According to the CIA the hostage crises was a direct result of the United States implementing a coup in Iran of 1953, starting riots, stealing their only resource, and installing a military dictator - the Shah.
The coup was directed by Kermit Roosevelt.
America has been guilty of crimes too, ya know.
"Where is the proof? I dont see any proof besides someones opinion!
"
- It's part of American history, Marie. I'm shocked you didn't already know about it.
The CIA even admits it on their official website:
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/docs/v41i5a01p.htm
PBS reported on it as well here. Check it out:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8805492666867691245&q=1953+coup&total=72&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9
Anon,
I know all this, I know it's part of History. But how much of History is actual fact?
Sometimes we have to go to bed with the lesser of two evils in order to preserve our sanctity.
You cant blame every attack on or against America as America's fault!
How many other countries have done worse than we America could ever do?
And what the heck did we ever do to the Japanese to get attacked?
We have helped, freed, and fed more people than any other nation on the planet.
Who do they alway's come to or call on? America
There is no excuse for attacking America PERIOD!
"You cant blame every attack on or against America as America's fault!"
- I'm not. But in the case of the 1979 hostage crises, according to the CIA, it was a direct result of the 1953 coup that we implemented to take over their oil reserves.
America is the greatest country ever but we still have to be humble and call a spade a spade. We can't discount our wrongs simply b/c we've done good in other instances. That coup is the primary reason that Iranians don't care for America.
It's about being honest with ourselves. When we mention the hostage crises we have to also acknowledge the reason that it happened.
Anon,
Give me a break!
C'mon, 26 years later?
How could that be a "Direct Result"?
The 1979 hostage Crisis was implemented by TERRORIST'S Period!
And thier radical ideology!
We have put up with terrorist attacks for as long as I can remember and we are sick of taking this crap.
I dont know what else to tell you.
anonymous arpee said...I'm not. But in the case of the 1979 hostage crises, according to the CIA, it was a direct result of the 1953 coup that we implemented to take over their oil reserves.
This is nowhere near the truth. The hostage crisis came about from the ayatollah khomeni returning to Iran from France to institute an Islamic revolution. The Shah was ousted because he was backed by a weak and stupid US president that didn't have the guts or brains to take care of business where it needed to taken care of. James Earl Carter is at fault for not backing up our men and women at the US Embassy in Tehran.
Another arpee lie and distortion dispelled.
How could that be a "Direct Result"?
- B/c the crises started days after the Shah was out of office. The Shah is the gruesome dictator that we and the British government put and kept in power. He was much worse than Saddam Hussein.
Here's 33 seconds:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8759679618884919114&q=blowback+iran&total=60&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7
Sorry. I didn't mean to put "33 seconds" there. Anyway, it's from the History Channel.
No lies, jg.
Anon,
The entire point is being missed by you, Akmenutjob is a Terrorist, he alway's has been, and he alway's will be.
He is helping to supply insurgents with weaponry to kill our Troops in Iraq NOW!!
He want's to wipe Israel off the map NOW!
He want's to aquire nulear weapons NOW!
He is being a very bad bad boy!
He must be stopped NOW!
This account was written by William Daugherty, who was taken hostage at the American Embassy in Iran in 1979.
The cable advised that President Carter had decided the previous day to admit the former Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, into the United States for life-saving medical treatment. From the perspective of the embassy staff, it was absolutely the worst thing that could happen, on two fronts: the decision would undo the progress, however slight, in improving United States-Iranian relations; and it would jeopardize the safety and security of all Americans in Iran. The embassy staff was utterly astonished, for not only had they warned Washington over the previous summer of the various dangers associated with such a decision, but some had even been told that by Washington seniors that the consequences of the shah’s admission to the United States were so obvious that no one would be "dumb enough" to allow it. Yet, with U.S.-Iranian relations still lacking real stability, and with an intense and growing distrust of the United States permeating the new Iranian "revolutionary" government, President Carter — unbelievably, from the embassy’s optic—had decided to allow the shah to enter the United States.
Was there no place else he could go? Was the United States the only country in the world with adequate medical facilities to treat the shah? Was the shah’s illness truly life-threatening at that point? Why did the president not insist on a second impartial medical opinion based on a physical examination and testing, rather than relying solely on the judgment of a physician engaged by a private citizen with a specific political agenda? Why did President Carter — seemingly against his own judgment — agree to the admission of the shah to the United States? Why did Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, and John McCloy so strongly urge the shah’s admission? Why did these three, who had no responsibility for policymaking or policy execution, press for a decision which had such awful consequences for the nation attached to it, consequences which were clearly apparent to all? Finally, if it was essential that the shah be permitted entry into the United States, why have not the reasons been clearly stated publicly? These issues require explanation, for this decision, founded as it was on "advice that was both flawed and incomplete" – is one of the most controversial decisions of post-World War Two foreign policy.
[snip]
Following on the heels of the shah’s arrival in the Bahamas were phone calls to the president in early April by David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger urging the shah’s admission. Carter was not pleased. While understanding of and grateful for the past benefits to the United States which flowed from the shah’s friendship, senior administration foreign policy officials — the president, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher, and Undersecretary of State David Newsom, among others — balanced the shah’s wishes against the hope that relations with the new government of Iran would improve given sufficient time and came down on the side of the promoting the political ties to the PGOI. They continued to hold firm against the shah’s admission.
[snip]
Decidedly unhappy in the Bahamas where he had evolved into a tourist attraction as he strolled the beaches, the shah again called upon his friend David Rockefeller to assist in obtaining safe haven in the United States. After a reassessment of the situation and American interest, Carter made it known to the shah through an emissary that this was not the time, an act which incensed Henry Kissinger. Rockefeller and Kissinger then smoothed the path for the shah to move on to Mexico, where he arrived on 10 June 1979. By late July. frustrated with the pressures being applied on the shah’s behalf, Carter wrote in his diary that he saw no particular benefit in letting the shah into the United States: "I don’t have any feelings that the shah or we would be better off with him playing tennis several hours a day in California instead of Acapulco, with Americans in Tehran being killed or kidnapped."
Kissinger was hardly appeased by the relocation of the shah to anywhere other than the United States. One minor question from this time centers on whether or not Kissinger at least intimated, if not threatened, in July of 1979 to "blackmail" the Carter administration into admitting the shah. The energies of the Carter national security team, since before inauguration day, had focused on a new Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT II) with the Soviets. The recently signed treaty was not without controversy and was looked upon with great skepticism among conservatives as it approached ratification in the Senate. It was well known that Kissinger would be called to testify as to the viability and wisdom of the agreement, and that — for Carter — the former secretary of state’s support of the treaty before the Senate was crucial to its ratification. Defeat of the treaty would be a blow to the success and credibility of Carter’s tenure. Brzezinski has asserted that, during at least one of Kissinger’s contacts with the White House over the admission of the shah, Kissinger "linked his willingness" to support SALT II to the shah’s entry: unless the shah was allowed into the United States, Kissinger would condemn the treaty before the Senate.
History is more complicated than one-liners declaring "It was Carter's fault."
Henry Kissinger, Rockefeller and others, as you will see if you bother to read the account of someone who was actually there, for all practical purposes blackmailed Carter into doing Kissinger's bidding.
Read the rest here:
http://tinyurl.com/yr37dr
Anon,
Way to treat an ally!!
That's the problem with Libertarians, even the Democrats of all people know we need allies!
Isolation is NOT the answer.
How about before our Constitution was ever written and of all people France came to our rescue when we were fighting the British for our Independence? How do you think we got the Statue Of Liberty?
We have momentos and gifts from all different countries because they knew we were going to be the beacon of Freedom and Democracy in the World.
Have you ever taken any road trips thoughout this beautiful Country of ours?
How can you say that about Israel?
We are ALWAY'S going to stand by Israel, does that mean we are going to get in the middle of all Israeli affairs NO!
But Israel has ALWAY'S been our ally and they alway's will be.
Joanne,
I think with that piece you just proved Jenn's point!
Sure there was a lot more involved Joanne but if carter hadn't been so weak and stupid we could have prevented the Islamist from taking the hostages. I was in Beirut at the time waiting for my orders to return to American soil but I was held indefinitely in combat readiness for extra months. Thank God, Thank God Carter was defeated and Reagan was elected. I was home by that time and I spent a lot more time in the middle east than I cared to. My eyes were made wide open by the huge blunders of James Earl Carter because it directly effected me.
"How can you say that about Israel?"
- B/c I'm an American and I will only fight for America. Isreal can take care of themselves. They've gotten enough American money already. That goes for any country - Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. The people who are so concerned with Isreal should move over there and help them out. Israel has been leeching off of us for too long. So don't take MY tax dollars and send them when we've got our own problems here, like Veterans getting adaquate care. Our Veterans are more important to me than Israel and all those other countries. They need to work out there own problems and we need to butt out.
Anon,
You obviously dont have any friends in ISRAEL!
I DO!
I have had enough of America bashing and Israel bashing from you Ron Paul freaks.
Maybe you and Ron Paul and the rest of your cult need your own little island somewhere so you can be all alone to smoke your dope, shoot your heroin, and isolate yourselves from the rest of the world.
You could call it "The Isolationist Country of Ron Paul"!
Post a Comment
<< Home