The Shrine

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=11 ... =351020101

This is direct from Iran's Press TV. More to follow as I organize what else I know that may be connected to this story.

I think this could be connected : http://www.thecomingdepression.net/main ... or-target/

We have at least one person on this board who's in Vancouver, right? Isn't that you, kali? I might suggest paying attention to this.

He's blowing hot air. It's proganda or some such. Whatever "blow" he delivers will be a symbolic gesture. Anything else risks getting the other world powers down on his ass.

$20 says they have a nuclear weapon.

This all started because the US refused to disarm its nukes.

Imakeholesinu wrote:$20 says they have a nuclear weapon.

This. And the nukes are probably coming from the nuclear fuel probably stolen from a poorly guarded Pakistani base by the Taliban last year, which story did not make the news. Believe it or not, Sine, we actually keep a pretty good hold on our nuclear arsenal in world terms, even if the rumors about our launch code being "000000000000" or a variant thereof back in the day are true - this is not because we keep a good hold in ABSOLUTE terms, but we just have better facilities and more loyal military officers (maybe, blech, who knows with Israel's hold on is being what it is in these times) and in someplace like Pakistan you can attack very poorly guarded nuclear installations where the soldiers are probably using old broken AK-47s and aren't as physically strong as our armies (due to good nutrition in America, fast food notwithstanding) and so the base is much easier to raid.

The former Soviet bloc countries are rife with corruption and post-Cold-War fissionables of all kinds, so that's shit too. Believe it or not, do you know which two nations I even SOMEWHAT trust with their nukes right now? France and China. Because they're doing better than other countries trying to climb out of the post-Bush economic wasteland and don't seem to have a serious mad on for anybody right now (China hates Japan for the Rape of Nanking and other WWII atrocities but they sure won't nuke them especially while Japan's under our protection and they seem to be mellowing out as they get rich anyway).

You have to remember, the holders of nuclear weapons are human too, and they CAN get pissed off, and after you go to so much trouble to make the toy, why not use it? And thus the world, while doing better than it was during the Cold War, is still far from free of nuclear fear. I would have put money against nuclear weapons being used on humans before I found out about how lousy Israel's government is being towards us right now, at this point I have no faith the Mossad won't put a bug in the CIA's ear about nuking some or another part of the world for nefarious purpose. Sorry if that offends you, Kupek, or anyone else on the boards, but it's true...

The Pakistan Daily wrote: "Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."

If you want to rally the Iranian people behind you, you don't attack Canada. That is the worst target ever. You attack (and harm grievously or defeat) Israel.

It is probably going to turn out to be an economic agreement with China, if you want to be realistic (look at the trade climate between the US and China right now). Iran is very unlikely to start any shit with North America.

Turtles in space! Sounds like a crappy TMNT sequel:

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nati ... 56151.html

Mental wrote:This. And the nukes are probably coming from the nuclear fuel probably stolen from a poorly guarded Pakistani base by the Taliban last year, which story did not make the news. Believe it or not, Sine, we actually keep a pretty good hold on our nuclear arsenal in world terms, even if the rumors about our launch code being "000000000000" or a variant thereof back in the day are true - this is not because we keep a good hold in ABSOLUTE terms, but we just have better facilities and more loyal military officers (maybe, blech, who knows with Israel's hold on is being what it is in these times) and in someplace like Pakistan you can attack very poorly guarded nuclear installations where the soldiers are probably using old broken AK-47s and aren't as physically strong as our armies (due to good nutrition in America, fast food notwithstanding) and so the base is much easier to raid.

One, there is no such thing as a "story that did not make the news", unless it's totally batshit insane.

Two, the fact that the US guards its nukes has nothing to do with anything. I said that: "This all started because the US refused to disarm its nukes." Why? Because every other country thinks being like the US and having a nuke is cool. To all of the other countries that have them, it's like a status symbol. "If I have a nuke, other countries will respect me and won't fuck with me."

And for the most part, it's true. We need to disarm, and then disarm every other country.

SineSwiper wrote: One, there is no such thing as a "story that did not make the news", unless it's totally batshit insane.

True. Perhaps I should have said "didn't break wide". I only know it because of arguing with some extremely conservative person on Newsweek who mentioned it on the comments section of a board when we were arguing, but he's a reliable source for all as annoying as he is and I believe him.

SineSwiper wrote: Two, the fact that the US guards its nukes has nothing to do with anything. I said that: "This all started because the US refused to disarm its nukes." Why? Because every other country thinks being like the US and having a nuke is cool. To all of the other countries that have them, it's like a status symbol. "If I have a nuke, other countries will respect me and won't fuck with me."

And for the most part, it's true. We need to disarm, and then disarm every other country.

I don't trust the rest of the world to de-fang completely along with us or respect us if we do.

The problem is, there is something very real about what you said - "If I have a nuke, other countries will respect me and won't fuck with me." This actually happens to be very very true. If you have a nuke, other countries will respect you and not fuck with you - as much.

The thing is though, we DO need to partially disarm. We don't need 3000 missiles. It's expensive and encourages proliferation just as you said. And our OVERRELIANCE on the nuclear deterrent instead of being sane about it encourages others to do the same. So yes, in general I do agree that your analysis is in the right direction.

Mental wrote:

The Pakistan Daily wrote: "Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."

Did you quote that "story" because you were making some clever point/joke that I missed or did you quote it because you are stupid?

That is a serious question by the way, I read your post 3 times trying to figure it out.

Mental wrote:I think this could be connected : http://www.thecomingdepression.net/main ... or-target/

We have at least one person on this board who's in Vancouver, right? Isn't that you, kali? I might suggest paying attention to this.

I don't pay attention to idiotic articles where the closest thing approximating a referenced source is a link to youtube. I genuinely feel dumber having read that.

You worry me a bit...I am reading some pretty radical..."beliefs" in the subtext of the nonsense you are posting lately, sprinkled with a hefty portion of paranoia.

I don't think this proclamation by Ahmadinejad is as sinister as you're thinking. Do you really think a president is going to announce an action as terrible as what you're proposing that flippantly? No country is going to use nuclear weapons as haphazardly as you're thinking. Any government at least has the check and balance system of "You're going to launch a nuclear strike on ____? Are you fucking insane?" Something much more than some president saying "We're going to do something!" is going to happen before that shit lets loose. Either that or terrorism which I can't exactly do much about so I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

And who is this Tzipora Menache? She doesn't appear to exist other than this supposed quote. Spokeswoman? Couldn't this just be a vague way to lie about her having credentials while in actuality she's probably just some person.. speaking.. who is a woman from Israel? I can't make out the name in that picture below it that's supposedly her but Tzipora Menache does not appear to be something that would likely be written on that name tag. It looks like her first name is shorter and her last name is at the very least longer than her first.

Mental wrote:

The Pakistan Daily wrote: "Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."

If you believe this - both that Israel controls our government, media and entertainment and that an Israeli "spokeswoman" would say so - then you are farther gone than I thought.

Kupek wrote: If you believe this - both that Israel controls our government, media and entertainment and that an Israeli "spokeswoman" would say so - then you are farther gone than I thought.

Yes, well. There's that, too.

Kupek wrote: If you believe this - both that Israel controls our government, media and entertainment and that an Israeli "spokeswoman" would say so - then you are farther gone than I thought.

Exactly...it reads like scripted propaganda penned by uneducated extremists without any appreciation for subtlety or context.

That something so stupid exists isn't surprising. That mental would eat it up, is...and why I combed his post repeatedly hoping I was missing a joke.

kali o. wrote:

Mental wrote:

The Pakistan Daily wrote: "Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."

Did you quote that "story" because you were making some clever point/joke that I missed or did you quote it because you are stupid?

That is a serious question by the way, I read your post 3 times trying to figure it out.

Mental wrote:I think this could be connected : http://www.thecomingdepression.net/main ... or-target/

We have at least one person on this board who's in Vancouver, right? Isn't that you, kali? I might suggest paying attention to this.

I don't pay attention to idiotic articles where the closest thing approximating a referenced source is a link to youtube. I genuinely feel dumber having read that.

You worry me a bit...I am reading some pretty radical..."beliefs" in the subtext of the nonsense you are posting lately, sprinkled with a hefty portion of paranoia.

response redacted, at least in public...noted and logged.

i don't really care what you think about this, however, and as you are an admin with full access to what i redacted, i hope that was clear. my only intent was to inform you about possibilities. it was done in a gesture of help, but it's clear you're not really interested.

Just for reference, for anyone else, this may have been what Ahmadinejad meant -

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/02/ ... tml?hpt=T1

Iran's now officially nuclear-armed. Still, I advocate being far more afraid of the CIA than them...at least for now...

Mental wrote:Just for reference, for anyone else, this may have been what Ahmadinejad meant -

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/02/ ... tml?hpt=T1

Iran's now officially nuclear-armed. Still, I advocate being far more afraid of the CIA than them...at least for now...

I am on my way to school, so I just skimmed over your article. But please post the quote from it that tells us that Iran has, in their possession, a nuclear weapon.

Okay. "They can officially enrich uranium". I will bet you about half my possessions Ahmadinejad wouldn't have said shit unless they've got a few bombs, however. They've been at this for a long time now and the Iranians are some of the best nuclear physicists in the world. Iran is nobody's fool and we keep making them out to be...

Mental wrote:Okay. "They can officially enrich uranium". I will bet you about half my possessions Ahmadinejad wouldn't have said shit unless they've got a few bombs, however. They've been at this for a long time now and the Iranians are some of the best nuclear physicists in the world. Iran is nobody's fool and we keep making them out to be...

They are using the nuclear program as a means of nationalist pride. Whether they do or do not have a nuke is up to speculation. The consequences of having nuclear weapons is much higher than the potential gains. What does Iran gain by having nukes? The only reason any country would want to have nuclear weapons is to either deter a possible war and/or to get resources from the US as incentive to shut the program down (the latter proving to not work in the North Korean example. They will promise the resources, but never deliver).

Mental wrote: response redacted, at least in public...noted and logged.

i don't really care what you think about this, however, and as you are an admin with full access to what i redacted, i hope that was clear. my only intent was to inform you about possibilities. it was done in a gesture of help, but it's clear you're not really interested.

I can't see what you edited. And while I always appreciate friendly gestures, my comments stand. Do some fact checking, scale back your willingness to jump to wild conclusions, alter your reading material sources and contemplate why you are foolish enough to eat up obvious propaganda.

And is it really all that wrong for a country to act in its own best interest? Getting nuclear arms is a great way to get taken seriously. We aren't exactly providing the greatest of examples to the contrary at the moment. Nobody with a head on their shoulders thinks Iran is full of fools, but that's what they would be if they initiated aggressive actions with nuclear arms as their main arguing point. They're barely stable as it is. Arresting protesters and heavily restricting access to the Internet is proof of that.

Also, until they perform an actual physical test or some such they are not "officially nuclear-armed." If they were don't you think they would actually say so? What does he gain from keeping it a secret? There won't be a secret attack on us from them. That would be one of the dumbest things in the world. You think we got overwhelming support for 9/11? Could you imagine a nuclear strike on one of our major population centers? Jesus, even I would want to join the military.

Bovine, this quesiton,

bovine wrote:What does Iran gain by having nukes?

Is in opposition to this statement:

bovine wrote:They are using the nuclear program as a means of nationalist pride.

While I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, I recognize it's rational for the Iranian government to pursue them. As an unstable, unpopular government, they have to exert effort to maintain power. Producing their own nuclear weapons could be an enormous rallying point for their government.

nuclear program = nuclear power, not nuclear weapons.

And I think my reasoning still holds if you consider nuclear weapons.

Kupek wrote:And I think my reasoning still holds if you consider nuclear weapons.

I disagree. I can see how nuclear weapons would bring the people together much like their nuclear power program would, but it is the clear repercussions that the country would face on the international level that would be too severe to warrant their creation.

I do not believe that Iran thinks either the US or Israel poses an imminent enough threat to justify nuclear weapons as a deterrent at the cost of its international trade.

Iran does not gain anything by having nuclear weapons. Any national pride in them would be lost due to economic turmoil and even with ICBM capabilities, Iran would only be more under threat by the US and Israel who would then realistically consider attacking it.

bovine wrote:I disagree. I can see how nuclear weapons would bring the people together much like their nuclear power program would, but it is the clear repercussions that the country would face on the international level that would be too severe to warrant their creation.

You're trying to answer the question "What is in Iran's best interest?" I'm trying to answer the question "What is in the Iranian government's best interest?" The two are related, but a nation's government itself has the additional burden of remaining in power. What it takes to remain in power is sometimes in opposition to the nation's interests. Democratically elected governments have to deal with this problem (re-election), but it's much more pronounced with a government that only pretends to be democratically elected. The chance of revolution is much higher.

kali o. wrote:

Mental wrote: response redacted, at least in public...noted and logged.

i don't really care what you think about this, however, and as you are an admin with full access to what i redacted, i hope that was clear. my only intent was to inform you about possibilities. it was done in a gesture of help, but it's clear you're not really interested.

I can't see what you edited. And while I always appreciate friendly gestures, my comments stand. Do some fact checking, scale back your willingness to jump to wild conclusions, alter your reading material sources and contemplate why you are foolish enough to eat up obvious propaganda.

Kali, the idea of the CIA blowing you into a fine paste just about made my night. Do whatever you want, where the Olympics are concerned. Just trust me that I have nothing more to say to you on the issue.

It's entirely possible - even probable - that nothing will happen over the course of the Olympics. I would love to be wrong. Ahmadinejad was obviously talking about Iran's new nukes (I stand by my analysis on that one) so that threat is over. As for the CIA - I certainly hope I'm wrong on that one. There is little you could say to convince me the CIA, FBI, and American intelligence in general are not a lot of lying fucking thugs and repressed homosexual murderers at this point.

Prejudiced as though this may sound, I have heard it is true - both my CIA and FBI are both full of repressed angry gay men who wouldn't bother me if they didn't keep fucking around and acting like a bunch of "homos", if we're still going to use this word around here (it's still on the topics page, after all). The sexuality obviously doesn't bother me, given my own bisexuality - the murderousness and pretending to be something they're not does. Somewhere I hope J. Edgar Hoover's spirit and that of Roy Kohn are having a good old time reaming each other out and getting frisky. I wish the rest of them would just fucking let it go.

That being said, if nothing goes down at the Olympics, I will indeed dial back on the wild theories for awhile. I'm not completely stupid either. Best to you, as it were.

Mental wrote: Kali, the idea of the CIA blowing you into a fine paste just about made my night.

Mmmm, wishing death on me I don't mind -- you are a proven psychopath. But for some reason, your transparent display of homosexual and jew bigotry bugs me...as does your fantasy of terrorism in my hometown.

The fact that you package it with a degree of stupidity that would make an uneducated gullible preteen blush just heightens it all and rubs me totally the wrong way.

Am I being unfair? Is the shit that dribbles out of your addled little mind only pissing me off? I really don't know...no one else really seems to react to it like I do. I know I can't stand you. I know it bugs me to know I am coming to a place where someone as fucked up as you also frequents...and so I kinda lurk lately. I know I can't come here without inevitably reading some stupid shit you write and I lack the self control needed to NOT hit the reply button...which just ends up making me feel more shitty than pleased.

I don't know which will come first. You joining some militant compound in Utah or tOWS getting an ignore feature. But I eagerly await one or the other, so I can start enjoying this place again.

!!!!!! Kali, I didn't realize that things said on the Internet negatively effected you this much .

I'll remember to be nice to you in the future. Everyone, make a special effort to be nice to Kali!

Julius Seeker wrote:!!!!!! Kali, I didn't realize that things said on the Internet negatively effected you this much .

I'll remember to be nice to you in the future. Everyone, make a special effort to be nice to Kali!

I'm thhhhensitive, so thanks

He hates America, he hates jews and he likely hates gays too, through some perversion of identification & self loathing. This would normally be fascinating to watch emerge through his new paranoid ranting, but enough is enough...for me. I'm worn and out of material.

Instead of zeroing in to the Mass Effect 2 thread like I should, I'm clicking on this pile of shit. I have no self control, I admit it. I need an IGNORE feature...at least I'm self aware enough to admit when I need help.

HALP!

Kupek wrote:

bovine wrote:I disagree. I can see how nuclear weapons would bring the people together much like their nuclear power program would, but it is the clear repercussions that the country would face on the international level that would be too severe to warrant their creation.

You're trying to answer the question "What is in Iran's best interest?" I'm trying to answer the question "What is in the Iranian government's best interest?" The two are related, but a nation's government itself has the additional burden of remaining in power. What it takes to remain in power is sometimes in opposition to the nation's interests. Democratically elected governments have to deal with this problem (re-election), but it's much more pronounced with a government that only pretends to be democratically elected. The chance of revolution is much higher.

Iran has been rather unsympathetic to its voting public lately. The previous election was contested both internally and internationally, as well as theuse of their police forces to violently suppress demonstrations. They are a democratic country, but they have been showing a great disdain for the citizens of the country.

You're very right about how democratic governments are much more likely to follow public opinion other than reason, but I'm not entirely sure where the power base lies in this country anymore. The ayatollah?