Saturday, May 27, 2006


Turkish authorities have ... stopped a shipment of aluminum material to Iran at the last minute, seizing the material at Gurbulak border point with Iran. ... authorities have confiscated documents and computers from the companies and that the investigation was still underway. Most of the shipments to Iran by the companies included dual use material of aluminum, steel and iron products and electronic equipment which can be used in defense industry, it said.

The government report recommended that prosecutors file charges against three Iranians for smuggling and falsifying official documents, but it was not clear whether any of them were in custody. It also suggested the confiscation of the assets of both companies involved.
This is more proof that the neighborhood is increasingly and more openly hostile to Iran - and Assad - and the Iranian-Syrian jihadoterrorist proxies. (And this -- like the exit of Asad from Lebanon and the capitulation by Kaddafy -- proves that the Bush Doctrine is working):
Jordan recently caught Hamas red-handed, Egypt caught the palistani-terrorists (who had Iranian backing) behind the Sinai bombings; Lebanon has been openly hostile to Assad and his Hizballah stooges for months; Iraq wants the infiltration by jihaidsts over the Syrian border stopped; and now Turkey joins in the GET TOUGH stance against Iran.
The NOOSE is tightening - around Assad's neck, and Ahmadinejad's. Slowly but surely. Faster please...


Anonymous said...


they said it best. I'll say it this way, sometimes lacking irony:

Kind of embarrassing, eh, asstoot?

As to the Turkey/Iran story. Look,unreliable, Turkey is moving to Sunni "extremism"; Iran is Shia.
I never said they loved each other.
Problem for your adoration of Bush's self-defeating policy is, there's more than enough Sunni anti-Americans and Shia anti-Americans to feud with each other
and still neutralize US goals.

As for Lebanon being openly hostile to Syria, which Lebanese?
Some in the government are still very fond of Syria. And Hizbollah is going nowhere, faggiddaboutit.
Though Bush demanded they dismantle long ago, right?

Neither is Assad anytime soon.
Bet on it.

reliapundit said...

you wrote:


this is false.

both eu/un/bush and iraq favor iranian research and civilian nuclear programs.

all want iran's programs to be non-weapons programs. there is NO SPLIT.

REPEAT: there is no split on this.

the SPIN you are duped by is leftist propaganda by cnn/nytimes/commies scum.

you can stop being a dupe. just start reading non-leftist news-sites.

it's easy.

reliapundit said...

here's a link:


Saturday, May 27, 2006

Lost in translation?

Does the CNN have problems with translation from Arabic to English or is it a case of deliberate twisting of facts?

Yesterday Iraq's and Iran's foreign ministers had a joint press conference in Baghdad after which the CNN ran a headline that reads "Iraqi minister defends Iranian nuclear program" and wrote:

Iran has a right to develop nuclear technology and the international community should drop its demands that Tehran prove it's not trying to build a nuclear weapon, Iraq's foreign minister said Friday.


"Iran doesn't claim that they want to obtain a nuclear weapon or a nuclear bomb, so there is no need that we ask them for any guarantee now," Hoshyar Zebari said after meeting with his Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki.

I wasn't there at the press conference but I was able to find an audio clip of the same part of minister Zibari's statement through Radio Sawa, and what he said here is so much different from what the CNN claimed he did (my translation):

We respect Iran's and every other nation's right to pursue nuclear technology for research purposes and peaceful use given they accept [giving] the internationally required guarantees that this will not lead to an armament race in the region…

Audio clip available here (Arabic)

Listening to the 2nd version of the story (in Zibari's own voice) it is clear that Iraq recognizes Iran's right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes exclusively and is moreover asking Iran for guarantees, not the other way around CNN!

Posted by Omar @ 17:06

if you think iraq and usa disagree on this then you are a total ass.

i think you MIGHTR be ready to WAKE UP AND OPEN YOUR EYES:

and admit that the elftists have been LYING to you.

you don't have to be a dupe of the left.

the choice is yours.

wake up.

Anonymous said...

Ho Ho Ho. The Iraqi government is dominated by the pro-Iranian Dawa Party and another,the party of Sistani, an Iranian though living in Iraq. The parties each have
private militia adjuncts of pro-Iranian fighters who have not been
disbanded as Buch in 2004 vowed
would be. And unReliable here
chooses to believe the Iraqi
government majority and the
majority Shias they represent would be bothered by a nuclear


Anonymous said...


more importantly, these are the actual conditions prevailing in Iraq which escapist defenders of Bush like to ignore.

reliapundit said...

there is less jihad in iraq than sudan and india on a yearly basis the last three years - as in fewer people killed by jihadists and fewer attacks.

sistani and moki are not jihadists, and sistani overtly defnds a secular government and ejects the iranian model.

idiots like this anonymous poster argue using UNFALSIFIABLE and therefore meaningless arguments: if we were to put in a government made up of stooges of our policies then they crey empire; if we allow indigenous peoples to make their own plicies then they cry FAILURE.

facts thoughbn are facts:

iraq is no longer a totalitarian nation ruled by a genocideal maniac - in which hundreds of thouisdands of unarmedn kurds and shias are rotuhinely murdered each year.

iraq is now a constitutional democracy in which shias and kurds are now armed and do fight back.

most shias and most kurds are better oiff: they ahve more freeodma dn olre rightrs - like freedom of spoeech expression and religon. and they are all materially better off too. this alon comprises 75% of the iraqi population. and this alone is proofd that so far things are better for most iraqis.

iraq supports the eu/un/usa positon on iran's nukes.

iraq supports a seculartized government and trejects the iranian model.

ALLO elements of iraq are represewnted in the givernemtn - obne POPULARLY formed, by CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE, OF THE GOVERNED.

this is the essence of democracy.

and this is a fundamental truth that my anonymous commenter is incapable of accepting - propbaly because of cognitive dissonce and BDS.


Anonymous said...

you can believe "unreliable" or you can believe Bush's plunging numbers,mostly due to what the public rightly considers an unwinnable and unnecessary war against a neutered dictator whose own neighbors no longer feared him and begged Bush not to attack.

The Shia militias and government
hate the US and Israel as much as the Sunni jihadists and will align with Iran as soon as the US leaves in bloody defeat.

Meanwhile the US is hated even in Kabul Afghanistan, where a traffic accident today caused large riots.
The Afghans rightly consider the US
an occupier;many will probably join the jihad and eventually come here and attack us unless America's
changes its ways.

Let "unreliable" be among the remaining 31% Bush holdouts,
while the hero Murtha warns the
Haditha massacre will be worse for the US than Abu Ghraib!

Anonymous said...



Anonymous said...


this is who controls the southern third of Iraq and they are NOT
conveyors of democracy.

reliapundit said...

shias control their region.
kurds their region.

this is good.

they are better off.

bagdad is the major front in the war on terror.

if we pull out, then bibladen/zarqawi win.

i support emocracy for all peoples. not just westerners.

bagdad people are now oputting more demands on the physical plant: needing/using more gasoline and electricity and power. their economy is BOOMING.

they will succeed over the terrorists inpsite of carping by defeatist appeasers like you.

Anonymous said...

unreliapundit has no choice but to

I would suggest this is not what the parents of US soldiers
believe they were fighting to
transfer power to.

This aside,Bush defined the government of Iran as an equal
spoke on the axis of evil,because
they fund what he calls "terrorism."

The Shia control then is a defeat for Bush policy;nothing could be clearer.

reliapundit said...

1 - bush defined this campaign as part of the global war on terror from the very start. he also said democracy was the cute for the root casues, from the verybstart.

i recommend you google and read bush's speech at the UNGA in sept of 2002 - six months before the war.

NO ONE serving in iraq - and fighting the terrorists from ALL: OVER - including iran - is surprised. and theior parents have nothing to do wioth it. most are not "kids" as you lefties are so fond of thinking/charging.

we now have iran (and syria) literally surrounded, and the entire UNSC and EU united to isolate them further if they eacxh fail to accede to th next round of ultimatums.

so things are porgreessing - or should i say: coming to a head.

russia and china will abstain in the ened, and whine when WE take action. but not do anything except whine.

ultimately only regime change in syria and iran will stop the terror in iraq and iarael.

we are proceeding to effect regime change in both placxe on many fronts.


which is hardly what leftiejekrs like you rant about - claiming that bush is a unilateralist and
use the mitlary forsters".

like all things: the left is wrong again.

the left hasn't gotten anything right - EVER.

if you wanna make poverty history, ya gotta make the left history.

whay socialism has done to zimbawe it did toi russia and vietnam and north korea and cuba and china and everyhwere else it was ever tried.
even sweden - whic from 1850-1950 was one of the fastest growing ecnomies in the world.

since then it is a stagmnanting pool of welfare recipients. with an ever growing number of women hating gay hating rape-loving muslims.

bush can stop the west from eroding from within at the heand of the leftiosts and from woithout at the hands of the jihadomaniacs.

and you know that. and you want the west to die. all post-mderni leftists do. youbalme the West for 3rd world poverty, and global warming. both of which are not true.

that's why you haver BDS.

it's easier to balme bush than accept the fact that your ideoloigy has been entirely discredited.

bush will win. and so will the west.

iraq will remain a democrfacy. iran's mullahs will be overthrown.

jihaofterrorirsm will be defeated.


becase yesterday has never defeated tomourrow. and leftism and statism of all types - marxist, stalinist, hitlerist, maoist, jihadist, baathist - cannopt stop the march of ever-increasing human liberty and individual rights.

i know you'd rather have elitists like hillary make healthcare decisions for you, but it just doesn;t work well that way. nopbetter now than in the USSR. or north korea.


reliapundit said...

shia control - democratically - of shia regions is good and NOT a defeat for bush.

Anonymous said...


above shows....
one can trust NOTHING "good"
from the Bushies about Iraq. the brazen lies imitate the very people unreliable claims to oppose.

Anonymous said...

"Bush has Syria and Iran literally surrounded"

Is this why McCain, (whom I disdain) and Biden (whom I also disdain) say troop size needs to be doubled just in iraq to defeat the insurgency?

They're right. But the US is already overstretched and Bush
would need a draft to put them there. And if you believe the protests got rough in 1968....

reliapundit said...

we dont need to invade iran.
we dont need more troopps in iraq.
mccain called for ground troops 2 b sent into servia. he was wrong then; he is wrong now.

we donl;t need more troops. we need the leftie loons like you to shut up, and for us public to be patient.

surrounding iran can help us with them in many ways: like an embargo of gasoline/kerosene and spare parts for factories and jets etc.

and remeber: the popularly elected givt of iraq can be more ruthless with the sunnis and jihadomaniancs than we can be. i think they will be the ones to defeat the badguys.

which is EXACTLY what our policy is: as they stand-up we will stand-down.

is that too difficult for you to wrap ypour duped/brainwashed leftist mind around!?>

Anonymous said...

Your hero Bush himself disqualified the new "government"
in Iraq from being termed "popularly elected."

In demanding Syria leave Lebanon he said "a true free election cannot be held in an occupied country." He meant Lebanon but he condemns the election in Iraq by these very words.

No matter-the Iraqis themselves have little confidence in it and the Interior Ministry was successfully attacked yesterday,killing two employees.

The Shias are as anti-American
as the Sunni insurgents. And a loose coalition between Shia-dominated Iraq and Iran is a defeat for America and Bush.
"Unreliable" is an escapist from reality.

reliapundit said...

you are weird.

iraq is a democracy, they wrote their own constitution.

their government rules by consent of the governed. there is less murdering there now than under saddam.

the usa has NEVER demanded that our allies - the ones WE liberated - follow opurt polcies in lockstep. iraq will find thier own way - like france and japan. et al.

that is: the iraqis will fond their way if the doves aof the Left dont get in power here in the USA and do to them what they did to the South Vietnamese and the Contras: ABANDON/STAB THE IN THE BACk

you are in denial.