Friday, February 23, 2007

The enemy plan, I wonder if the Dems are the party that agreed?

Does anyone find this hard to believe, I don't, makes perfect sense to me.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann claims to know of a plan, already worked out with a line drawn on the map, for the partition of Iraq in which Iran will control half of the country and set it up as a “a terrorist safe haven zone” and a staging area for attacks around the Middle East and on the United States.
She said this in a taped interview St. Cloud Times reporter Lawrence Schumacher, which is available as a podcast. (If you go to this link, look down on the right for “download Capitolcast.”)
There are other interesting and provocative statements in the interview. But the most amazing is at the end, when the discussion turned to Iran and Iraq, Bachmann’s reasons for sticking with the stay-until-victory camp, and her beliefs, stated as established fact, that Iran has reached an agreement to divide Iraq and set up a free-terrorism zone.
Here’s the extended excerpt:
“Iran is the trouble maker, trying to tip over apple carts all over Baghdad right now because they want America to pull out. And do you know why? It’s because they’ve already decided that they’re going to partition Iraq.
And half of Iraq, the western, northern portion of Iraq, is going to be called…. the Iraq State of Islam, something like that. And I’m sorry, I don’t have the official name, but it’s meant to be the training ground for the terrorists. There’s already an agreement made.
They are going to get half of Iraq and that is going to be a terrorist safe haven zone where they can go ahead and bring about more terrorist attacks in the Middle East region and then to come against the United States because we are their avowed enemy.”
Bachmann did not say how she knew about this plan, nor with whom Iran has made this deal.
The Big Question is seeking an interview with Bachmann to flesh out her comments. I have received a tentative commitment for an interview this afternoon and will post what I get.

No suprise there.
Hat tip to Drudge

No comments: