The Iranian Assassination Attempt

Just demonstrates once again that our fearless leaders are clueless about Islam:

The Iranian government was making a statement, one it continues to make, and one which the Obama administration is incapable of hearing: the Iranian government does not perceive international law or any Western-based institutional system as legitimate. This is the same statement that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the underwear bomber, made when he pleaded guilty in a Detroit court of attempting to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight. Abdulmutallab claimed that he was not guilty under Islamic law, and was only pleading guilty because he was in an American courtroom governed by American law.

This was the mindset of Yasser Arafat, when in the wake of having signed the Oslo accords, he hastened to tell Arab audiences — in Arabic — that he had in actuality signed the Peace of Mecca, the peace Mohammed signed with the Koresh tribe.

Weeks ago, the Egyptian government withheld protection of the Israeli embassy from a bloodthirsty mob until President Obama himself directly intervened with the Egyptians. Prior to that moment, the Egyptian government was perfectly content to ignore its legal obligation to protect a foreign embassy, even when it meant the embassy personnel would be slaughtered.

The authentic voice of the Arab Spring is not seen in the MSM hype or the Obama administration depiction of democracy breaking out in Tahrir Square, but in the rape of journalist Lara Logan. The charade of the Arab Spring is revealed in the brain-splattered head of a Coptic Christian, who was one of dozens of Christians purposely crushed by military vehicles as they repeatedly sped through the crowd mauling demonstrators.

The Christians are protesting the burning of churches, a conflagration unleashed with the rise of Egypt’s Arab Spring and the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood. The face of the Arab Spring, so lauded by this administration and the MSM, is revealed in pictures of rank and file soldiers joining with the Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood, who were brutally attacking the Christian demonstrators that the soldiers were supposed to protect.

In another indulgence of fatuous behavior, President Obama asked both sides to exercise restraint.

As I said, it’s like the idiot principal who suspends both the bully and the bullied for “fighting.”

14 thoughts on “The Iranian Assassination Attempt”

  1. Of course it’s much worse than that, but there doesn’t seem to be any good analogies. Can we quit pretending Islam is not the problem. Nobody is saying people born into that religion are bad, but the religion, by it’s fruits, has proved itself bad. We are a tolerant people, which sometimes means we are a stupid people. This can not be tolerated. The religion, not the people, needs to be wiped out totally and completely. Nothing of it should remain except it’s true history in case we should ever forget.

    Go ahead and call me a bigot.

  2. Allahpundit over at Hot Air and others have been questioning the circumstances behind the Iranian attempt.

    The line of reasoning is that the Iranians may be a lot of things, but one thing they are in covert ops of this kind is careful. If they use proxies and cutouts, they use groups like Hizbolah and Hamas that they have infiltrated, screened, and vetted for their religious and ideological purity. The notion of coordinating with the Zeta Mexican drug gang goes against the conventional wisdom regarding how the Iranians operate.

    In light of that analysis, all manners of theories have been advanced: rogue element within Iran’s security apparatus, Iranian opposition doing this to discredit the Regime, an operation that was intended to be found out to engage in a deliberate provocation, some even go so far as to suggest a Wag the Dog scenario that our side is attempting to provoke a confrontation with Iran at this time.

    Sometimes a stopped clock reads the correct time, and maybe the Iranian government is telling the truth that they had nothing to do with this. False flag operations to “pin” something on another country or group is a fact of life in the Middle East along with believe that everything is such a false flag op.

    I think we need to be careful criticizing the Obama people for being “Soft on Iran” when more facts of this case need to come out. I am not saying we should surrender to the Iranians, I am just saying that even a lot of our people have “problems” with the official narrative on this one.

  3. If this is real, then I don’t understand WTH the Iranians were trying to achieve. If it isn’t, then I don’t understand WTH whoever was behind it was trying to achieve.

    1. “If this is real, then I don’t understand WTH the Iranians were trying to achieve.”

      For the Quds Force, the killing of a member of the Saudi Royal Family, high-ranking enough to be Ambassador to the US, would be an investment in future coercion of *other* members of the Saudi Royal Family.

      “See?,…We can kill anyone we want to, anywhere we want to. The Family cannot protect you, and even if you run to a safe house in the US, the US cannot protect you. After all, they could not protect an accredited Ambassador,…what efforts would they spend on you?”

      In the Mini-series “Shogun”, there is a point during the negotiations inside Osaka Castle, where a retainer of the character analogizing Ieyassu Tokugawa id trapped somewhere in the halls of Osaka castle, by archers who can kill him before he can harm them. He is given a choice “Lord XXX will become our clan’s spy, or he will die *now*!” This was credible in the series, because this would be a credible threat in Japan around 1600 AD.

      The assasination of the Ambassador to the US would make far broader threats to key members of the Saudi Royal Family, in important positions in Saudi government, much more credible.

      Think of it as an investment in future agents.

  4. A distraction from”fast and furious”? Nothing like a new war to take attention away from mass corruption.

  5. lbparker:

    Worked for Clinton.

    Paul, considering what the Iranians have done to us over the last 30 years, we’ve BEEN soft. Whether they were responsible or not, it’s time to put the screws to them as much as possible.

    1. Ken,
      where are the “Obama Lied, People Died” protestors? He PROMISED them he’d get us out of the M.E., he PROMISED he’d close Gitmo, he PROMISED he’d get peace in the world.

      So far he’s not only NOT done those things, he’s involved us in places where even the typically blood thirsty, kill all the non-whites Conservatives are questioning WHY we need to be involved militarily.

      I’m reminded more and more of Lyndon Johnson. Except the entire M.E. and most of Africa are Obama’s Viet Nam.

    2. It is strange he managed to find the one “christian” terrorist group in the world.

      Read some speculation elsewhere that this could be payment for the help against Al Shabab we have been getting from Uganda.

  6. “Paul, considering what the Iranians have done to us over the last 30 years, we’ve BEEN soft. ”

    Well, that is one thread of opinion in the Right Blogosphere, that “we” have been soft, and especially President Obama has been soft on Iran.

    The other thread, and I credit Allahpundit over at HotAir, is that maybe we’ve been had. That is, why should be demand that Mr. Obama be tough with Iran right now when this could be all a setup. The Iranians are saying it is all to deflect attention from domestic U.S. concerns (cough, OWS, cough), and you know the adage about the stopped clock.

    OK, OK, this is beginning to sound like Trutherism. Maybe I can come around to the view that this is For Real.

    The WaPo had some reporting where the drew a diagram (for engineers like me!) showing that the central figure in the plot is the loser Texas car salesman cousin to a high-ranking special-ops dude in Iran. Loser Texas car salesman in turn hooked up with a Zeta who was the nephew to his girlfriend, where Zeta dude turned out to be on the payroll of the FBI.

    But just because you are a ne’er-do-well cousin to some serious bad-ass Iranian covert ops master, I imagine that if you are a serious bad-ass Iranian covert ops master you have all kinds of relatives given the big families at least that generation had, and it may not mean loser Texas car salesman is a Big Man in Iran.

    Let’s try this on for size. There was some politically incorrect FBI dude who was giving a seminar linking a lot of lone wolf terror ops to Islam inasmuch as you don’t need orders to engage in terror ops, you can get your go-code from the holy book along with some over enthusiastic preaching of your local cleric.

    Let’s say loser Texas car salesman knows his cousin is a Big Man in Iran and is envious and too wants to be a Big Man in Iran. So he hatches this scheme. Maybe all the talk on the FBI “wires” of being able to pay big Iranian gummint money is just that, Big Man Talk and maybe his cousin in Iran would not give him the time of day.

    So maybe when the Obama people engage some Iranian diplomats in some WTF talk, maybe that is the perception, that the Iranians could not be that crazy and that stupid, and that the Obama people are doing the right thing. You know, the stopped clock deal.

  7. Rand, I was hoping to get your take on the deal Israel made with Hamas to free Gilad Shalit. They are trading 1,000 palestinian terrorists and criminals in order to get Shalit back safely.

    Here’s a quote from a commentator on Politico.com:


    Although Prime Minister Netanyahu has written and spoken on the dangers of negotiating with terrorists and particularly of giving in to their demands, he crossed every so-called red line he has ever drawn in his books and speeches in voting for this arrangement.

    The notion that Netanyahu won’t compromise on what he states are his iron-clad principles is simply belied by his actions, and not only with regard to the decision to accept the deal brokered for the return of Sergeant Gilad Shalit. There are some reports that the prime minister rejected an earlier proposal that met more of Israel’s demands than the one he finally accepted. But in this instance, the proposal was backed by the heads of both intelligence agencies who now have the challenge of insuring that none of the prisoners released from prison engage in actions that kill more Israeli citizens.

  8. My take on it: Don’t believe Netanyahu’s “window dressing”. His fight with Obama was insincere, just as his “red lines” are insincere. He is Israel’s Romney.

Comments are closed.