Well the Brits are known to have some really good ex-sas "security professionals" they keep on contract for just this sort of thing. Hell a lot of the problems we are having now can be laid on their door step, they might as well take part in cleaning up their hundred year old mess.
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 5:10 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: conditional declaration of terrorism - Iran Couple of high paid guys who you don't even know exist so there's no tracing it back to a specific person/government. 'In house' people are good but professionals are better. Fewer complications. > Couple D-Boys, Coupla Mossad guys. > > Game over. > > To bad we won't do it. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 4:45 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: conditional declaration of terrorism - Iran > > Lets see. > America can refrain from announcing it's potential plans to bomb or > invade Iran. > > The UN can stop trying to enforce the NNTP or any resolution against > Iran > > Iran can stop threatening to destroy fellow UN members, stop > threatening to destroy world oil traffic, stop threatening to release > terrorists against the world, stop funding terrorists, and maybe even > do a little something to stop the world from thinking they are trying > to build a nuclear weapon and distribute the tech to all of it's > allies. > > Chances of ANY of that happening (other than the UN just caving)? 0% > > Where do we go from here? Well, we've tried talk. We've tried to let > Russia talk. We've tried to let the UN talk. Nothing has worked. How > about we just forget about them, let them build whatever they are > building, and let nature take it's course. If they are stupid enough > to fulfill their threats (yes, they are) then by by world. If not, > then it's all talk. > I personally expect there to be some assassinations in the next year > and some changes in the regime in Iran because of them. At least > that's what I would do. The problem is NOT Iran. It's the leaders of > Iran. It's not an entire people but a few who are connected to another > few who are connected to another few. Remove the few and the many will > live in peace. But that's just my take. > >> Welp, both sides have flexed their muscles. >> >> We know what the US plans are (we've seen them in action, and nothing >> is ruled out so Nukes are definitely an option), and we know what >> Iran's plans are (No Nukes, but Germ Warfare, blowing up >> installations, affecting the flow of oil throughout the world). >> >> Where do we go from here? >> >> On 4/28/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> http://www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=4722 > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:205841 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
