Quote of the day

posted at 10:45 pm on August 28, 2007 by Allahpundit

“If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight.”

I hope Mossad dispatches a sniper to Trafalgar to wait for the dancing dumbass if the Iranians do bomb Israel.

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 10:48 PM

Unfortunatly so would most everyone else in England.

VolMagic on August 28, 2007 at 10:51 PM

You know what would be good? Seeing NY nuked, and all the muslims dancing. That might open up some eyes and consolidate opinion just enough to move forward with this problem.

jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 10:51 PM

You know what would be good?

No that wouldn’t be good! Jesus Christ, dude!

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 10:53 PM

I thought it would be “I am not Gay” -Sen. Craig

jp on August 28, 2007 at 10:54 PM

You know what would be good? Seeing NY Mecca nuked, and all the muslims dancing Rioting. That might open up some eyes and consolidate opinion just enough to move forward with this problem.

jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 10:51 PM

There fix’t that for accuracy……

doriangrey on August 28, 2007 at 10:54 PM

You know what would be good? Seeing NY nuked, and all the muslims dancing. That might open up some eyes and consolidate opinion just enough to move forward with this problem.
jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 10:51 PM

You know, jihadwatcher, I read a comment of yours the other day concerning gravity and I thought to myself “this guy is impressive”. Now, not so much.

Big A, where do you live?

jaime on August 28, 2007 at 10:56 PM

Yeah, I was gonna say, isn’t Allah a New Yorker?

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 10:59 PM

doriangrey on August 28, 2007 at 10:54 PM

You do realize there’s a policy against saying that…right?

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:00 PM

You do realize there’s a policy against saying that…right?
Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:00 PM

Saying what?

jaime on August 28, 2007 at 11:02 PM

Look at his edits, jaime.

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:03 PM

Mecca? No worse than New York, I wouldn’t think.

jaime on August 28, 2007 at 11:04 PM

More important than gravity, is the education of the masses concerning the islamic threat. And by threat, not the threat of terrorism, but the threat of sharia, that will enslave us all with no recourse if our society accepts it.

9/11 wasn’t nearly enough. I hope the next attack will be. If no attack is forthcoming, sharia is a fait acomplis. I can’t imagine anything worse than that.

I guess you could say, I appreciate the gravity of the situation.

jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 11:04 PM

Yeah, the ban hammer’s coming out before this thread is done, it seems. Well, that’s healthy. Gotta prune the hedges from time to time.

Allahpundit on August 28, 2007 at 11:05 PM

Umm We did see massive damage to NYC and thousands dead and many in the country want to act like nothing happened

And typically it a muslim in a western country not in the line of fire who would sance for joy.

The liberals have so embolded Islamic nuts that they no longer fear to cheer against us

William Amos on August 28, 2007 at 11:07 PM

I would guess that if that even approached to being close to happening, we’d be seeing a very close re-do of the Osirak reactor incident. Or if worse comes to worse, the Samson option. Of course, I prefer the Osirak reactor option. Because I love going to Israel.

mjk on August 28, 2007 at 11:07 PM

Allahpundit on August 28, 2007 at 11:05 PM

Bail, its Paul Anka!

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:07 PM

Bari Atwan founded the pan-Arab daily in London in 1989, and today the paper has a circulation of around 50,000. He is also a regular commentator on Sky News and BBC News 24

Well there you have it, folks. Dag nabit, how can these buffoons have such an effective propaganda machine? Is there no cookie jar safe from their unwashed hands?

Weight of Glory on August 28, 2007 at 11:08 PM

jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 11:04 PM

That’s better. We don’t need to wish NY gets nuked.

jaime on August 28, 2007 at 11:08 PM

“The BBC is required to explore a range of views, so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or underrepresented.”

So blatant anti-Semitism is a “significant strand of thought.” And we wouldn’t want to underrepresent it.

How very sophisticated.

NellE on August 28, 2007 at 11:12 PM

In 2003 after saddam was out of power and we had “Mission Acomplished” most of the dictators of the world were scared to death. Kaddaffi wanted to make deals and Iran and North Korea went on A bomb research kicks to hopefully stave off the threat that they might be next.

What happened isnt that the US lost its way its that the anti war in their haste to hate GW gave the enemy hope. They kept attacking GW and the US and the press ate that up.

Now we are weaker and the dems want to pretend there isnt even a war out there. And our enemies plot and plan and the left says “Who cares we want health care”

Good luck to us all

William Amos on August 28, 2007 at 11:12 PM

How very sophisticated.

NellE on August 28, 2007 at 11:12 PM

Yes, Yes. Spit spot, and all that.

Weight of Glory on August 28, 2007 at 11:13 PM

You know what would be good?…

Already happened–and almost immediately tossed down the memory hole, except for here.

Ed Driscoll on August 28, 2007 at 11:15 PM

I’m just amazed that there isn’t a massive outcry over this. I don’t think if you were of that status in the US you could. I don’t even think Ibrihim Hooper is dumb enough to say something like that.

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:15 PM

BTW, look at this site to calculate city damage from a nuclear blast. You will see that the small yield devices likely to get into the hands of al qaeda are actually not able to blow up NYC. While they have no NYC in the pulldown menu, you will see that a 1 KT device takes out neighborhoods, not cities, and not collosal cities like NY. Not only would NYC survive, but most of it would suffer no damage. And the radiation? Residual radiation levels fall rapidly after a blast.

jihadwatcher on August 28, 2007 at 11:24 PM

William Amos on August 28, 2007 at 11:12 PM

But it wasn’t just that. It was also George Bush declaring that we have to fight jihadis because they attack civilians – which is not why we fight jihadis. We fight jihadis because they attack us. It doesn’t matter whether they were attacking our civilians or our military.

Because of this attitude (which denies all of known human history) Bush tied the US’ hands in all sorts of combat – trying to remain holier-than-thou by not attacking the poor civilians of the enemy. Anti-war morons or idiotic mainstream press reports had no effect on the fact that Bush, in his own attempt to show his moral superiority (as opposed to showing that he was concerned with winning the war) led to these problems. As soon as the arabs/persians/muslims saw that Bush would never bomb cities or bring great pain to general populations they knew that they were free to run wild, and might actually win. That’s what attracted all the new jihadis and caused the level of terrorism to skyrocket after 9/11, instead of dropping to ZERO, as it should have. As soon as Bush tried to ignore the existence of Israel while putting together that utterly moronic coalition of EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY ON EARTH (except Israel) Fatah saw the opportunity and started hammering Tel Aviv and Jerusalem with the most suicide bombs ever. At that point the jihadis around the world knew that they were on the road to success. Who could lose, given the sort of advantages that Bush has given all of our enemies?

Yes, the left and the MSM did a great deal of damage to our side in this war, but not more than Bush. And to have let Iran go this long does not inspire any sort of optimism in me.

progressoverpeace on August 28, 2007 at 11:32 PM

I’m just amazed that there isn’t a massive outcry over this.

Bad Candy on August 28, 2007 at 11:15 PM

Sensitivities, it all about being sensitive against offending anyone, Muslim. All you infidels can go to hell.

This is, of course, what was once England.

Kini on August 28, 2007 at 11:35 PM

Probably I saw it here first.

Long live the Jewish-Christian brotherhood!

petefrt on August 28, 2007 at 11:37 PM

Because of this attitude (which denies all of known human history) Bush tied the US’ hands in all sorts of combat – trying to remain holier-than-thou by not attacking the poor civilians of the enemy. Anti-war morons or idiotic mainstream press reports had no effect on the fact that Bush, in his own attempt to show his moral superiority (as opposed to showing that he was concerned with winning the war) led to these problems

I wholeheartledly disagree.

We dont have to carpet bomb cities. Nor dl we have to take the fight to civilian populations.

We have repeated won the military aspect of this war. We are only losing the propaganda aspect of this war.

How many time has the left ranted “kill one terrorist that only spawns ten more” ? How many times have we seen “The are just freedom fighters fighting to drive out the american occupiers” ?

And it isnt just the Jihadists stating that. ITs the left in the west. The jihadist have tapped into the “we are the underdogs against the mighty American military” evne though they have mostly attacked and murdered civilians in cowardly suicide attacks.

The left and our media feed that crap and it causes our morale to break down and the enemies to lift.

God forbid that we ever have to attack civilian targets. That means we are losing the war more.

William Amos on August 28, 2007 at 11:43 PM

What jihadwatcher might have meant was, if 9/11 didn’t open people’s eyes, what in the name of G-d will it take? I pray it isn’t another attack or, heaven forbid, something worse than last time!

I’m not hoping for the next strike, just recognizing that, due mostly to the propaganda we’ve tolerated and the naivete of the left-center, it’s inevitable. I just hope the next attack is survivable.

stonemeister on August 28, 2007 at 11:45 PM

This is, of course, what was once England.
Kini on August 28, 2007 at 11:35 PM

Sigh. No insult meant to her now, but once what a great and benevolent nation. The roots of her ‘rights of man’ thinking have planted the seeds in India, Australia, New Zealand, etc, etc.

Spirit of 1776 on August 28, 2007 at 11:52 PM

petefrt on August 28, 2007 at 11:37 PM

Good video.

jaime on August 29, 2007 at 12:00 AM

What a bunch of sickos the media has become. This goes beyond license, or bias, or plain ol propaganda. Here they give public voice to someone who will dance in the streets if missles fall on civilians without even raising an eyebrow at the statement.

If GW, or Rudy, or Mitt, or Billy Graham said such a thing about Qum or Damascus the press would riot in the streets. But if the ‘victim’ Arabs want to slaughter a group of Jewish men women and children, we need to ‘understand’ their viewpoint.

I got a point for em………..but I don’t wanna get banned.

Limerick on August 29, 2007 at 12:12 AM

I got a point for em………..but I don’t wanna get banned.

Limerick on August 29, 2007 at 12:12 AM

Probably a good move. I probably went too far myself…sorry bout that.

Bad Candy on August 29, 2007 at 12:16 AM

“Islam is peace.”

- George W. Bush, September 17, 2001

I sure hope he has realized by now that statement was total horse-puckey.

infidel4life on August 29, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Islam, the Religion of Piece(s)! That’s what left after they do what they do best.

TruthToBeTold on August 29, 2007 at 12:44 AM

I wholeheartledly disagree.

We dont have to carpet bomb cities. Nor dl we have to take the fight to civilian populations.

William Amos on August 28, 2007 at 11:43 PM

Well, that was our main defense strategy against the USSR, and remains the whole reason behind having strategic nukes, at all.

Why do we have a strategic nuke arsenal, exactly? I mean, really.

We have repeated won the military aspect of this war. We are only losing the propaganda aspect of this war.

The enemy POPULATION is not scared, and without their support the jihad would shrivel and die. No one is scared that the US will actually destroy their country. In fact, all know that the US is more concerned with rebuilding what we destroy (this is the result of idiots misunderstanding Reconstruction and the Marshall plan).

But, if you don’t believe me then just listen to what other countries think about threatening the US. They all love doing it and none of them seems to be the least bit scared of any sort of reaction. And I’m not just talking about Iran, but all of them.

Maybe that doesn’t seem like a bad sign to you, but there’s no doubt in my mind.

The left and our media feed that crap and it causes our morale to break down and the enemies to lift.

I agree. But that is not our major problem. Besides, it was Bush’s job to prepare OUR population for what was needed to be done … and “religion of peace” was the exact opposite – without any prompting from the idiot left or the MSM. And he wouldn’t shut up about it, either. Bush’s inane repetition of that phrase did more to harm us than all the moronic leftist babble they could muster up. The enemy heard Bush say those words and felt that SUBMISSION was just around the corner (as I stated before).

God forbid that we ever have to attack civilian targets. That means we are losing the war more.

Huh? WWII. That’s how wars go. Killing civilians is part of it. It’s a tough world out there, but the enemy decides the rules, if one wants to be “fair”. The most important element is that the enemy population must have the will to fight, or even think about fighting, totally excised from them. This is not “winning hearts and minds” (not if you go by history, and certainly the history of the area and the peoples) but making sure that they are more scared of us than of the jihadis and enemies of progress. So, to pull off the table even threats to the population … I mean that’s just silliness – especially in TRIBAL CULTURES!!!!!

I happen to be very much a cultural relativist. When we fight other cultures, we must fight in a way that they understand. Otherwise it’s just a silly waste. We are not fighting against individualistic westerners – though we hold only individuals to account. We are fighting against tribal cultures, and we must dispense punishment to them the same way that they dispense punishment among themselves – so that they understand.

You disagree with that, I guess because you have a moral thing. Holier-than-thou kills, and it usually kills the holier one.

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2007 at 12:49 AM

Rather than hoping for another gigantic attack like 9-11, let’s be civil and continue to do what some of us have done for years-grass roots warning/spreading the word about the dangers of jihad. Not all are asleep, though many millions are lulled into a false sense of security by the MSM downplaying the threat, demonizing President Bush, calling it “his war” as if we were somehow being misled. The ‘misleaders’ are the ones who say that there is no threat, no just reason for this war.

Doug on August 29, 2007 at 1:08 AM

“If the Iranian missiles strike Israel, by Allah, I will go to Trafalgar Square and dance with delight.”

If the Iranian Israeli missiles strike Israel Iran, by Allah[pundit], I will go to Trafalgar Times Square and dance with delight.”

There. Fixed if for ‘em.

bofh on August 29, 2007 at 1:16 AM

While the guy is dancing his jig in Trafalgar Square, he might keep this in mind:
U.S. Air Force: Israel has 400 nukes, building naval Force

MB4 on August 29, 2007 at 1:47 AM

The Wahhabis have actually thought about “nuking” Mecca themselves…because it’s existence promotes idolatry/black rock worship/mo-hammed worship, all of which takes away from strict slavery to allah. Let’s not do the Soddis any favors, shall we?

/sp intentional.

JollyRoger on August 29, 2007 at 1:53 AM

It’s always bothered me that Tony Blair had to talk Bush out
of bombing Al-Jazerra, when he should have had to talk him oout of bombing the BBC.

vegasbookie on August 29, 2007 at 2:07 AM

Of course, jihadwatcher meant Washington, D.C,, not NYC, and specifically during the State of the Union Address, since these are the baffling clowns who are too busy indicting Gonzales out of office and fiddling under airport bathroom stall dividers, and calling Islam a religion of peace to defend Western Civilization against a terroristic theocratic threat that makes the Nazis and fascists and commies look like a cloud of gnats.

profitsbeard on August 29, 2007 at 2:09 AM

I’m quite sure he danced with delight on 09/11/2001 … wherever he was that day.

SilverStar830 on August 29, 2007 at 5:24 AM

Religion of peace.

Hawkins1701 on August 29, 2007 at 5:25 AM

You fooled me, I thought the quote was from Jimmy Carter. Castro’s favorite president.

right2bright on August 29, 2007 at 7:30 AM

So I guess if a retaliatory nuke hits Mecca, the meteors and other ancient religious trash of Islam gets moved to a black box on Trafalgar Square? Why not? London goes from Mod to Muslim in forty-years.

The British are truly a “silly little people”, to give away their heritage and country to the evil which is Islam. Screw King Arthur, they need Churchill to come back.

“The once and future PM”

Hening on August 29, 2007 at 7:57 AM

I hate to break it to you guys but limited war doesn’t work and we haven’t really had one in the win column since Truman sacked MacArthur. To win a WAR you have to make the American public overwhelmingly HATE the enemy. Not just the enemies leadership but all the enemy in a way that makes them dehumanize them first in their minds and then be perfectly willing to look at the carnage our forces deliver to a whole nation or series of nations and dance in the street for joy. Islam is in a position to do this but we are not, not any more.

Buzzy on August 29, 2007 at 8:22 AM

‘An eye for an eye’ justice would require an attack on Mecca.

Then we could identify the enemy, without the need to profile. Just identify those who appear confused and wandering around aimlessly trying to figure out what direction is east.

MSGTAS on August 29, 2007 at 10:27 AM

Seems like I’m screwed on two counts. I live in NY, and wanted to take my kids to England before it closed.

JiangxiDad on August 29, 2007 at 11:18 AM

The British are truly a “silly little people”, to give away their heritage and country to the evil which is Islam. Screw King Arthur, they need Churchill to come back.

“The once and future PM”

Hening on August 29, 2007 at 7:57 AM

It’s sad to see something pass. I grieve with you. But that western civ torch was passed to us nearly a hundred years ago. Without anyone to pass it to now, it’s just us baby!

Live free or die!

JiangxiDad on August 29, 2007 at 11:22 AM

The British are truly a “silly little people”,
Hening on August 29, 2007 at 7:57 AM

Nice twist of David Lean’s T.E. Lawrence.

jaime on August 29, 2007 at 12:25 PM

As it is written: “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”

Zaire67 on August 29, 2007 at 2:21 PM