Scott Ritter on the Iranian Bomb

[Stray Pooch]

This phony indignation at a supposedly "sick puppy" who "belongs in jail" is ludicrous - - a little bit of honesty would reveal that some (not all) young women can be very attractive at that age - - especially considering the European ages of consent:

So in order to support your rabid anti-Americanism, you have now come out in favor of the Iranian hardliners and men who solicit sex from children. 

Just for the record, whether a 15 year old is attractive or not is completely irrelevant to whether a 44 year old should solicit sex from one.  I met my wife when she was 15 and she was hot.  I was 17.  If I saw a 15 year old girl today that looked like my wife did then (and come to think of it four years ago I was a father to one) I would look at her as a child - not a potential sex partner.  Yeah, he is a sick puppy who belongs in jail.

I'll let you know if I can find any serial-killers who hate America - well, other than Stalin or Mao.

[Plane]

<<Well that is a theroy.>>

Yeah that's right.  And if a man invites Jeffrey Dahmer to spend the night baby-sitting his eight-year-old son, and the next morning both Dahmer and the kid are gone, it's also a theory that Dahmer ate him.

It's also a theory that Dahmer just took the kid to see Walt Disney World and will bring him home before dinner time.  It's also a theory that the kid ate Jeffrey Dahmer.  And it's also a theory that the majority of Iranians voted against Ahmadinejad and are spontaneously rioting out of outrage that their guys officially lost when they got more votes and the CIA and British intelligence just scrupulously avoided interfering in the slightest degree with the elections held in a sovereign country out of a pure and reverent respect for the sovereignty of that country.

There are lots of theories.  What is your point?

That it is not harder to get a positivive outcome on a phone poll than it is to get more votes out of a town than its population, both of which happened.

<<Whereas you agree that the Iranian government is not all that good , why do you consider it impossible that the people of Iran might rise up against it on their own ?>>

Because, as I have already stated, the Washington Post's own poll three weeks in advance of the election showed Ahmadinejad winning by an even bigger majority than was officially counted for him.  Because rioting broke out even before the polls closed and because for at least three days following the elections, there were no statments from any of the losing parties just how this massive vote - - in a country of 73 million people - - was actually stolen.  It seemed kind of unusual that rioting would break out over a stolen election when nobody seemed to have any idea how a vote that huge could be stolen AND when reputable polls had predicted the result weeks ahead.  Because in the two or three days before the election almost a million new cell-phone subscribers were registered in Tehran alone, indicating preparations by the opposition parties to massively protest the "fixing" of elections that had not even at that point been held, let alone "fixed."  Because the  U.S. and Israel have threatened Iran on countless occasions with regime change, in attempts to get them to back off their nuclear programs, and the appearance of "spontaneous" crowds in the streets, "protesting" something or other that they never gave a shit about previously, is the classic hallmark of CIA regime-change modus operandi.

There are probably a few other good reasons I left out that show why these "protests" are probably not a popular uprising, but these reasons alone are way more than sufficient.

 
A million cell phones?
If this was an organisation this would be easily traceable anf an investigator could follow the money.
If the people at large realised by leaks and signs that the elections was about to be stolen they might prepare like this.


So ....Whereas you agree that the Iranian government is not all that good , why do you consider it impossible that the people of Iran might rise up against it on their own ?

[Michael Tee]

<<So ....Whereas you agree that the Iranian government is not all that good , why do you consider it impossible that the people of Iran might rise up against it on their own ?>>

I don't consider it impossible.  In fact the Iranians DID rise up on their own against the US puppet government of the Shah.

I consider it highly unlikely that this particular series of demonstrations and protests is a spontaneous uprising for reasons that I've already articulated in this thread - - suspicious resemblance to similar CIA provocations in Chile in 1972 and 73 and in Iran itself in the 1950s against the Mossadegh government; lack of any explanation of how the Iranian government could "fix" national elections in a national vote of a nation of 73 million citizens; immediate outcry of "stolen" elections without any indication how they had been stolen, breaking out while the polls were still open; rough correspondence, actually with a slimmer-than-predicted government margin, between official count and public-opinion poll of the Washington Post, with no intervening events between poll and vote to make the results different than as polled.

Lots of reasons to suspect that the story is NOT AT ALL like the BS purveyed in the Western MSM.  Nothing to indicate that it is what the Western MSM say it is.

[Amianthus]

lack of any explanation of how the Iranian government could "fix" national elections in a national vote of a nation of 73 million citizens; immediate outcry of "stolen" elections without any indication how they had been stolen, breaking out while the polls were still open; rough correspondence, actually with a slimmer-than-predicted government margin, between official count and public-opinion poll of the Washington Post, with no intervening events between poll and vote to make the results different than as polled.

And the claims continue in the face of evidence of widespread fraud in the Iranian elections.

Or do you think that voter turnouts of greater than 100% in 50 cities is just "normal democratic process"? Statistical analysis that shows that voting patterns did NOT match with polling prior to the election?

And before you respond AGAIN that you have no knowledge of these, I will remind you that I have pointed them out TWICE previously in this thread alone, plus elsewhere. Scroll up before you make another one shot reponse.

[Plane]

<<So ....Whereas you agree that the Iranian government is not all that good , why do you consider it impossible that the people of Iran might rise up against it on their own ?>>

I don't consider it impossible.  In fact the Iranians DID rise up on their own against the US puppet government of the Shah.

Are you certain that there was no outside involvement in the rebellion against the shah?


After all there was French involvement in the American revolution and German involvement in the Russian revolution.

I would think that revolutaionarys seek help as a general principal.

[Michael Tee]

<<And the claims continue in the face of evidence of widespread fraud in the Iranian elections.>>

I did not say that there was no widespread fraud in the Iranian elections. 

There was widespread fraud in the Afghan elections and nobody gives a shit.  There was widespread fraud in the American elections, esp. the two which Bush Jr. "won."  And supporters of the late LBJ, if religiously inclined, still thank the good Lord in every prayer for the Miracle of Precinct Box 13.

<<Or do you think that voter turnouts of greater than 100% in 50 cities is just "normal democratic process"? >>

It shows a desperate need for good old American know-how.  The crypto-fascist wing of the Republocrat Party has fixed elections from Saigon to Florida and then some and never in such a clumsy and amateurish manner.  It's downright embarrassing, for the "Iranian opposition" AND for their American bosses as well as for the regime itself.  Nobody comes out of this fiasco smelling like roses. 

<<Statistical analysis that shows that voting patterns did NOT match with polling prior to the election?>>

So what?  Unless the Washington Post poll totally missed the boat, it reported on the likely overall results of the election and the overall results matched the prediction (albeit with a narrower gov't margin.)  If patterns were mistaken, the likely answer is that one misread pattern favouring the gov't was matched by another misread pattern favouring the "opposition," canceling each other out, and the overall result was more or less as the Washington Post predicted. 

Iran is a nation of 73 million and had a substantial turnout at the polls.  Nobody has yet explained HOW a vote spread over a population that vast can be "fixed" without obvious signs of fixing visible to any polling station observer of any participant.  I regard it as extremely suspicious not only that the protests of a "fix" began even before the polling stations had closed, but that for at least three days I never saw anyone screaming "fix" answer the key question "How?"

"Statistical analysis shows . . . ."

Bullshit.  Statistical analysis shows over a million civilian deaths consequent upon the U.S. invasion of Iraq.  Guess we all believe the statistics we want to believe, eh Ami?  Polling sounds more like a secular religion than a scientific endeavour.  But I'll stick with the poll that the Washington Post took.  They're reasonably reputable, even though a part of the MSM.  They can't be whoring  ALL the time for the War Party, or they'd lose all credibility and be of no use at all to their masters.

[Amianthus]

Bullshit.  Statistical analysis shows over a million civilian deaths consequent upon the U.S. invasion of Iraq.  Guess we all believe the statistics we want to believe, eh Ami?  Polling sounds more like a secular religion than a scientific endeavour.  But I'll stick with the poll that the Washington Post took.  They're reasonably reputable, even though a part of the MSM.  They can't be whoring  ALL the time for the War Party, or they'd lose all credibility and be of no use at all to their masters.

Yeah, we ALL know that the Dept of Statistics at Princeton University are just whores for the GOP. That's a given.

 

[Michael Tee]

An Ivy League university of course as we all know is a hotbed of Islamic fundamentalism, in the case of Princeton, a Shi'ite fundamentalist hotbed.

It was therefore all the more shocking to find that Princeton's Dept. of Statistics would come out with an analysis of polling data seemingly at odds with the Shi'ite fundamentalist government of Iran.  Who would think that a polling arm of PRINCETON UNIVERSITY would ever interpret data in favour of the infidel U.S. Government and against their brother Islamic fanatics?  Surely this  treasonous behaviour from the heart of the Ivy League will bring down thunderous condemnation, fatwas even, from Muslim clerics worldwide.


<<Yeah, we ALL know that the Dept of Statistics at Princeton University are just whores for the GOP. >> 

 For them too?  Geeze, if you say so, Ami.  They're even bigger whores than I thought.  Who knew?

[Plane]

 

An idea whose time has come.

http://www.slate.com/id/2111172

http://www.absurdintellectual.com/2009/09/03/a-punctuation-mark-for-sarcasm-sadly-underused/

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2010/01/12/Company-creates-sarcasm-punctuation/UPI-55751263324278

[sirs]

lol