Iran agents 'planned US terror attacks'

K

killadoob

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 30, 2004
Messages
46,571
Reaction score
17
Location
South Africa.
Iran agents 'planned US terror attacks'

The US says it has broken up a major terror plot in which agents linked to Iran sought to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

Two men originally from Iran - one a naturalised US citizen - have been charged with counts of conspiracy, Attorney General Eric Holder said.

The plot was "conceived" in Iran by the Quds force, part of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, he added.

The state department has listed Iran as a "state sponsor" of terror since 1984.

Mr Holder described the plot as being "conceived, sponsored and directed by Iran", and said Tehran would be held accountable for its alleged involvement.

Top Iranian officials were responsible for the plans, Mr Holder said, adding that the White House would be announcing steps against Iran in the next few hours.
Drug cartel informant

The two men allegedly linked to the plot were named as Manssor Arbabsiar, a 56-year-old naturalised US citizen with dual Iranian and US passports, and Gholam Shakuri, based in Iran and said to be a member of Iran's Quds Force.

Mr Arbabsiar was arrested in September, Mr Holder said, but Mr Shakuri remains in Iran.

They were arrested after approaching an informant for the US Drug Enforcement Agency - under the impression that he was an operative of a Mexican drugs cartel - in order to arrange the assassination of the Saudi

ambassador to the US, Adel Al-Jubeir.

They have been charged with conspiracy to murder a foreign official, weapons conspiracy, and conspiracy to commit international terrorism charges over alleged plans to kill the Saudi ambassador.

Mr Arbabsiar, who is due to appear in court in New York on Tuesday, faces a potential life prison sentence if convicted on all charges, the Department of Justice said.

Criminal charges will be brought in the Southern District of New York because a downpayment of $100,000 was wired through a bank located in the Southern District of New York, officials say.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15266992

Sounds like more BS to escalate a war with iran and ensure when they do attack people think iran deserve it.

Shocking how people cannot see through these lies. Just caught the story on RT, i will post the RT story when it's up.
 
this could be construed as a Casus belli.

A member of a force that reports directly to the "supreme" leader of a state attempting to murder a member of another state's government.
 
Does it really matter at this stage of the game who is telling the truth and who is making stuff up?

Either there is going to be a war or there is not.

The only way to avert that is if the citizens of each nation make it absolutely clear that they are not in favour or war.

But my gut feeling is that both sides are itching for war.

In that case, they guy with the overwhelming firepower will win and will get to rewrite history.
 
Alan said:
this could be construed as a Casus belli.
Click to expand...

Yup the question is how many folks will believe the propaganda machine that will spew this across the world?

Why would the iranians do this? What do they gain by killing him? What does the US gain? well they need drums to beat this will make news and people will actually believe this BS.

Odd that this happened to be in the US and they could capture the people hahaha, very convenient. If it was iran and i highly doubt it they should hire people that won't crack so easily.

I hear the drums beating, i am trying to figure out what could the trigger for an attack could be, what would be needed to engage iran? Some more fabricated stories or perhaps some terror attack within the US? Tell me though is assassination now a terror attack? So when the US assassinate people in afghanistan or pakistan surely that is a terror attack? Why can they assassinate anyone they deem to be bad but iran for instance are called terror plotters?

Although it would have been far better to kill him and then blame iran. That sounds like a better plan, perhaps not full proof though and if the saudi's ever got wind of the americans having killed him i guess that would end poorly.

The trouble though gary who has the fire power? You attack iran and then you get to wonder who will china and russia support? Now if they support iran which is more than likely the case the fire power will not be the US. Nor will it be a war like we have seen in vietnam and iraq, it will more than likely be another nuclear stand off. Scary shyte if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
Garyvdh said:
Does it really matter at this stage of the game who is telling the truth and who is making stuff up?

Either there is going to be a war or there is not.

The only way to avert that is if the citizens of each nation make it absolutely clear that they are not in favour or war.

But my gut feeling is that both sides are itching for war.

In that case, they guy with the overwhelming firepower will win and will get to rewrite history.
Click to expand...

Both sides?
AFAIK this is Netanyahoos war, he's been punting this since 1995!
Will be sad if it happens.
Will be good if Russia, China and their allies stand with Iran.

But really is a BS story, the US will need Saudi if they attack Iran, seems too convenient.
 
killadoob said:
Yup the question is how many folks will believe the propaganda machine that will spew this across the world?

Why would the iranians do this? What do they gain by killing him? What does the US gain? well they need drums to beat this will make news and people will actually believe this BS.
Click to expand...

You expect rational behaviour from morons stuck in the middle ages?

After all the Russians poisoned a dissident in London with radioactive material!!!. How brazen was that and they're cold, calculated types well versed in Realpolitik not some superstitious nutters.

In any case why would the Obama administration do this now when a few years ago they reached out to Iran and quietly turned a blind eye while the Iranian regime openly slaughtered it's own citizens in the streets of Tehran?


4Motion said:
Will be good if Russia, China and their allies stand with Iran.
Click to expand...

What a righteous alliance that would be. Three brutal tyrannies. Might as well through in North Korea and Syria as well. :o
 
Alan said:
You expect rational behaviour from morons stuck in the middle ages?

After all the Russians poisoned a dissident in London with radioactive material!!!. How brazen was that and they're cold, calculated types well versed in Realpolitik not some superstitious nutters.

In any case why would the Obama administration do this now when a few years ago they reached out to Iran and quietly turned a blind eye while the Iranian regime openly slaughtered it's own citizens in the streets of Tehran?




What a righteous alliance that would be. Three brutal tyrannies. Might as well through in North Korea and Syria as well. :o
Click to expand...

If history is anything to go by alan i would have to say the US will use and abuse you until they cannot anymore then they will get angry, what comes next depends on how much BS the world buys.

Alan what do you think would be needed by either side to escalate a full blown war, obviously a fabricated story won't bring us there but what will?

Interesting how western websites claim they foiled the attack but RT reckon allegedly LOL

US allegedly foils hit on Saudi ambassador RT

http://rt.com/news/us-plot-assassinate-iran-617/
 
Last edited:
I will assume this is 99.9% bull**** by US and it's affiliates. On top of this, they are linking the "terrorist" to the drug Cartel in Mexico. This is how they will knock 2(3) birds down with 1 stone.

In the near future, the media will start linking immigrants from Mexico with terrorist activity. The masses will then be easily influenced to support whatever anti-immigration laws and policies the Government tells them support.
http://www.businessinsider.com/it-a...e-story-behind-todays-big-terror-plot-2011-10

Immigration = solved.

Then they can use the same excuse and pin terrorism on anything the Iran Government does thus enabling them to spy, then invade and eventually destroy and kill innocent people and destroy Iran families.

Iran = solved.

On a semi-related matter, some of the Senators are trying to pass a BILL that will put certain tariffs and restrictions on imports coming in from China...Remember they now blame china for Currency manipulation.
http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-approves-china-currency-bill-2011-10

POINT IS. US/EU have picked which countries they will invade next, Iran better start planning some counter-measures, whether it's 5 months or 5 years from now, the EU/US are coming for those resources!

People forget, the US/EU put their own interest first above all else. They could care less if 5 Million people are dying in Somalia or via unnecessary NATO bombs. What the US/EU does with NATO forces is not about world peace, it's about securing assets.

Life is a business.
 
Has the USA not wanted to bomb Iran for awhile now? Is this an election year in the USA? Is this just another False Flag Operation?
 
VioAdmin said:
People forget, the US/EU put their own interest first above all else. They could care less if 5 Million people are dying in Somalia or via unnecessary NATO bombs. What the US/EU does with NATO forces is not about world peace, it's about securing assets.

Life is a business.
Click to expand...

100%

RE. Iran agents 'planned US terror attacks'
My feeling is that this is as true as Saddam Hussein's WMD
 
pull the other one USA, pity many people will just buy this false flag fake terror rubbish like the obedient little sheep they are.
 
Fader4 said:
pull the other one USA, pity many people will just buy this false flag fake terror rubbish like the obedient little sheep they are.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough though fader if you look at gary and alan even they don't seemed convinced. I wonder if the days of the US lying and getting away with it are coming to an end. Are people finding catching on and realizing that they do this all the time? Granted alan and gary are not the most hard core USA fans though. Let me say US government fans just in case some chops think i mean the people or the country :D.

It seems they have been so used to being able to lie they now come up with the most ridiculous stories thinking people will just believe them.
 
Last edited:
killadoob said:
Oddly enough though fader if you look at gary and alan even they don't seemed convinced. I wonder if the days of the US lying and getting away with it are coming to an end. Are people finding catching on and realizing that they do this all the time? Granted alan and gary are not the most hard core USA fans though. Let me say US government fans just in case some chops think i mean the people or the country :D.

It seems they have been so used to being able to lie they now come up with the most ridiculous stories thinking people will just believe them.
Click to expand...

Some people still swallow any nonsense from the us when it comes to issues of "terror"

just look at the bin laden rubbish recently :whistle:

story changed about five times but peeps were still falling over themselves to make excuses and justifications for obvious US propaganda.
 
Or this could just be another stuff up from that buffoon of an Attorney General Eric Holder


President Obama says that he has “complete confidence” in Attorney General Eric Holder. That’s good news for Republicans. Pick almost any unnecessary, losing battle in Obama’s first term, and his hapless attorney general is at the center of it.

If not for the fact that so many of Holder’s decisions harm national security, he would be a political dream come true for the GOP – delivering up reliably disastrous controversies for the president every few months.

The latest controversy over whether Holder misled a House committee on “Operation Fast and Furious” — the botched federal gun sting that allowed hundreds of weapons to flow to Mexican drug cartels and resulted in the death of an ATF agent — is only the most recent of these debacles.

Holder’s bad advice began almost immediately after Obama took office, when he and White House counsel Greg Craig convinced the president to announce the closure of the prison at Guantanamo Bay by January 2010 — without even examining the feasibility of doing so. Not only did the president suffer the indignity of missing this deadline, public opinion turned against the decision so sharply that Democrats abandoned the president and joined Republicans in voting 90-to-6 in the Senate to block funds for the facility’s closure. Almost three years later, Guantanamo remains open and the administration has given up hope of closing it.

The next unneeded firestorm came with Holder’s decision to release classified Justice Department memos on the CIA terrorist interrogation program and reopen criminal investigations into the conduct of CIA interrogators. Holder overrode the objections of five CIA directors, including Leon Panetta. According to The Post, “Before his decision to reopen the cases, Holder did not read detailed memos that [career] prosecutors drafted and placed in files to explain their decision to decline prosecutions.” If he had bothered to do so, he could have predicted the eventual outcome: The special prosecutor he appointed came to the same conclusion as the career prosecutors under the Bush administration and found no criminal wrongdoing by the CIA officials involved in the agency’s Rendition, Detention and Interrogation program. After two years of wasted resources and needless controversy, Holder came up empty.

Then came Holder’s order to read Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (who goes on trial this week) a Miranda warning after just 50 minutes of questioning – an order the attorney general gave without even consulting chief intelligence or national security officials. Holder’s administration colleagues were forced to argue (implausibly) that Miranda was really not an impediment to effective interrogation – only to have Holder undercut them few months later when he admitted that this was not true, and asked Congress to fix the Miranda law to allow longer interrogations. Not only did Holder’s Miranda decision cost America valuable intelligence, the ensuing controversy helped propel Scott Brown to victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, costing Obama his filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. According to Brown’s chief strategist, internal polls showed the treatment of enemy combatants was a more potent issue in the election than was health care.

Then there was Holder’s catastrophic attempt to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters in federal court in New York City. According to The Post, Holder made the decision alone, at 1 a.m., while eating Chips Ahoy cookies at his kitchen table. He did so without first consulting New York officials, who responded with outrage — as did the general public. In the face of the bipartisan backlash, the administration was forced to backtrack, and it soon announced the resumption of military commission trials at Guantanamo for Mohammed and other terrorists.

This only scratches the surface of ill-fated Holder initiatives. He also provoked a political firestorm by withdrawing a lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party for violations of the Voting Rights Act, over the objections of six career lawyers at Justice. And then there was his decision to sue Arizona over its popular immigration law, over the objections of three Arizona Democrats engaged in tough reelection fights (two of whom lost their seats).

Many of these debacles stem from Holder’s failure to do due diligence: He failed to consult the intelligence community before giving the Christmas bomber a Miranda warning; he failed to read the memos in which career prosecutors explained why CIA prosecutions were a legal dead end; he failed to consult New York officials about trying Mohammed in their city; he failed to conduct even a cursory review before pushing Obama to announce the closure of Guantanamo; he failed to read the Arizona immigration law before publicly opposing it. One such failure is a mistake; this many is a pattern of gross incompetence.

Given his record of stumbling into one foreseeable and avoidable controversy after another, it is amazing Holder is still at his post. Come January 2013, it is unlikely he will remain there — regardless of who wins the election.

Marc A. Thiessen, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, writes a weekly online column for The Post.
Click to expand...
 
DigitalSoldier said:
Uhm killa,

so far you have called all stories reported by SKY and BBC or any other western media source as bs propaganda, but you believe everything said by RT and its affiliated sites ?

Do you honestly believe that Russia and one of its backward bronze age allies are not pushing some propaganda as well ?
Click to expand...

Well RT have not claimed iran never did it nor have they claimed they did, they have said allegedly meaning it could go either way. So how i can believe allegedly? What about allegedly is propaganda?

Now if the western news was a bit more like rt they would have used allegedly surely?
 
DigitalSoldier said:
Uhm killa,

so far you have called all stories reported by SKY and BBC or any other western media source as bs propaganda, but you believe everything said by RT and its affiliated sites ?

Do you honestly believe that Russia and one of its backward bronze age allies are not pushing some propaganda as well ?
Click to expand...

Iran Bronzed age?
Lol!! If they bronze what are we here in SA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X