U.S. Says Iran-Tied Terror Plot in Washington, D.C. Disrupted

reply to post by mademyself1984


Agreed. The timing for the release of this is questionable, but is it not possible for it to be true? Do I buy it hook,line and sinker?No. Do I want another war? Hell no! If I had my way all U.S. troops would be home. That includes Germany,Japan or anywhere else. Iran has submitted it's formal complaint to the U.N., now I would say that if we have proof we should show it.

Originally posted by Aeons
It makes them rile up like bees with smoke.

Smoke calms bees down...just sayin.

Originally posted by Drew99GT

Originally posted by concernedcitizen519
Eric Holder talking about it Live on CNN right now. Tune in.

What convenient timing, given this:

www.foxnews.com...

Eric Holder (and the Obama administration) is on the verge of losing his job over blatantly lying about Fast and Furious, and a day later, they foil an Iranian terror plot.

AHHH HA AHHH HAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAA LMAO. They really think the US public is that stupid!

Not only that, but according to Judge Nap, they knew about the "Iranian incident" for 11 days...how convenient that it gets disclosed the day the DOJ gets subpoened about Fast & Furious...

Fox News/Judge Nap video:
video.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Deetermined
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!

IRAN connection with Qods Force/Al Qaida:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

IRAN connection with Hezbollah/Mexican Drug Cartels:

myrick.house.gov...

What? Iran does deals with Al-Q, under the auspices of the Quranic teachings that you never ever side with a non-Muslim against a Muslim?

You don't say. That's fascinating.

Next you'll point out some crazy thing like how Iran released ...er.... allowed to escape house arrest .... Bin Laden's family and heads in a completely surprising moment of jail break history.

Did you even read the information in the report that was presented to Congress?

" Attention to the longstanding ties between top Iranian officials and al-Qa'ida leaders, including Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has been eschewed by a pervasive fundamental attribution error: ``Shiite Iran will not work with Sunni militants comprising the ranks of al-Qa'ida.'' This assessment fully ignores readily available evidence to the contrary. Indeed, such relationships span back to the early 1990s, when top officials from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps' clandestine Qods Force, working in concert with Iran's chief global terrorist proxy, Lebanese Hizballah, began training and equipping bin Laden's warriors. Then, following the 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 Americans, more evidence surfaced of operational linkages between al-Qa'ida and the Qods Force, an official Iranian paramilitary organization which possesses a mandate from Iran's Supreme Leader to fund, train, and equip Islamist terrorists. These very operational linkages are referenced within the 9/11 Commission Report, whose authors acknowledged the relationship between al-Qa'ida and Iran demonstrates that Sunni-Shiite divisions ``did not necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier to cooperation in terrorist operations.''

Full link:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

For some reason you have to copy and paste the full link into your browser for it to come up.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Xcouncil=wisdom
Seriously though...the argument that the Quds Force only works through proxy's, but wouldn't align with a Mexican Cartel? How does that make sense? Sounds like a perfect ally for them? Hmmm

It doesn't make sense that they would put their billion dollar business in jeopardy, and possibly bring the Mexican and U.S. military down on them hard, for 1.5 million bucks, that's chump change to them. Also, the Zetas don't even use bombs in Mexico, that would be a HUGE escalation for them on their own soil, much less the super power next door that they have been very careful not to let their violence spill into up to this point. And what about this used car salesman Iran was allegedly using, that wasn't a religious zealot or Iranian patriot, and besides money would have no reason to orchestrate this? Doesn't make sense, and on top of that, if they actually carried it out, it would come across as VERY suspect that the cartels would assassinate a Saudi official on U.S. soil. Not a great way to remove suspicion of an outside party.

Maybe you don't already know that Operation Fast and Furious was intentional to put arms in the hands of the Sinaloa cartel to fight the Zeta cartel off from trying to take over the Mexican government. They know our government is already helping the enemy to fight them.

I'm sure the CIA/DEA has a handful of members from both cartels in their pocket.

I can certainly understand why most of you would think that this was only a ploy to try and undermine Eric Holder's involvement in Operation Fast and Furious. Eric Holder may or may not end up being the ultimate fall guy. The truth is Eric Holder is a pawn just like Obama.

In my opinion, here are the real culprits to Operation Fast and Furious along with 60 years of drugs and arms trafficking:

www.capitolhillblue.com...

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by jhn7537

 

Please refer to the United Kingdom as the United Kingdom and not as England.

Or would you prefer I refer to the United States as Texas all the time?



Regards, Skellon.

Sensitive much? Call the United States Texas all you want, it wont bother me one bit. Not sure why someone saying England bothers you....

Originally posted by jhn7537

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by jhn7537

 

Please refer to the United Kingdom as the United Kingdom and not as England.

Or would you prefer I refer to the United States as Texas all the time?



Regards, Skellon.

Sensitive much? Call the United States Texas all you want, it wont bother me one bit. Not sure why someone saying England bothers you....

He must live in one of those countries that were conquered by the British, touchy subject...

Originally posted by Deetermined
Maybe you don't already know that Operation Fast and Furious was intentional to put arms in the hands of the Sinaloa cartel to fight the Zeta cartel off from trying to take over the Mexican government. They know our government is already helping the enemy to fight them.

If that were all true, seems to me Holder would be in some real deep doodoo for lying under oath and arming drug cartels.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Aeons
It makes them rile up like bees with smoke.

Smoke calms bees down...just sayin.

Okay, okay. My metaphor died a bad death.

I actually had an image of Billy the Exterminator getting bees out of a tree, but didn't think someone from the UK would follow that image.

Originally posted by Deetermined

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by Deetermined
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!

IRAN connection with Qods Force/Al Qaida:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

IRAN connection with Hezbollah/Mexican Drug Cartel

myrick.house.gov...

What? Iran does deals with Al-Q, under the auspices of the Quranic teachings that you never ever side with a non-Muslim against a Muslim?

You don't say. That's fascinating.

Next you'll point out some crazy thing like how Iran released ...er.... allowed to escape house arrest .... Bin Laden's family and heads in a completely surprising moment of jail break history.

Did you even read the information in the report that was presented to Congress?

" Attention to the longstanding ties between top Iranian officials and al-Qa'ida leaders, including Osama bin Laden's top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has been eschewed by a pervasive fundamental attribution error: ``Shiite Iran will not work with Sunni militants comprising the ranks of al-Qa'ida.'' This assessment fully ignores readily available evidence to the contrary. Indeed, such relationships span back to the early 1990s, when top officials from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps' clandestine Qods Force, working in concert with Iran's chief global terrorist proxy, Lebanese Hizballah, began training and equipping bin Laden's warriors. Then, following the 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 Americans, more evidence surfaced of operational linkages between al-Qa'ida and the Qods Force, an official Iranian paramilitary organization which possesses a mandate from Iran's Supreme Leader to fund, train, and equip Islamist terrorists. These very operational linkages are referenced within the 9/11 Commission Report, whose authors acknowledged the relationship between al-Qa'ida and Iran demonstrates that Sunni-Shiite divisions ``did not necessarily pose an insurmountable barrier to cooperation in terrorist operations.''

Full link:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

thomas.loc.gov...:H23SE1-0024:

For some reason you have to copy and paste the full link into your browser for it to come up.

edit on 12-10-2011 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

I agreed with you and was adding to your point. In a sarcastic way.

Iran has been dealing with Al-Q, and Hezbollah has been dealing with Al-Q, and Al-Q has cells from China to Tunisia.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Deetermined
Maybe you don't already know that Operation Fast and Furious was intentional to put arms in the hands of the Sinaloa cartel to fight the Zeta cartel off from trying to take over the Mexican government. They know our government is already helping the enemy to fight them.

If that were all true, seems to me Holder would be in some real deep doodoo for lying under oath and arming drug cartels.

That's why I think Holder could be the ultimate fall guy, but that's my point, he's only the fall guy. The real culprits who came up with the idea and duped Holder and all the other agencies to go along with them will never be held responsible.

I agreed with you and was adding to your point. In a sarcastic way.

Iran has been dealing with Al-Q, and Hezbollah has been dealing with Al-Q, and Al-Q has cells from China to Tunisia.

Sorry, sometimes it's hard to catch sarcasm in print. I really thought that maybe you thought it was against their Muslim principles and they would never do it, but then again, when does any country hold to it's moral beliefs any more?

Anyone else notice we already have Iran surrounded. We occupy Iraq on Iran's Western border, and Afghanistan and Pakistan on Iran's Eastern Border. IMO i think we invaded those countries first so once we could justify an attack on Iran we would be forcing them to fight on two fronts diving Iran's forces greatly weakening them. This is similar to what happened to Germany in WWII. Fighting the U.S. in the West and the Russians in the east.

Originally posted by JoBee
Anyone else notice we already have Iran surrounded. We occupy Iraq on Iran's Western border, and Afghanistan and Pakistan on Iran's Eastern Border. IMO i think we invaded those countries first so once we could justify an attack on Iran we would be forcing them to fight on two fronts diving Iran's forces greatly weakening them. This is similar to what happened to Germany in WWII. Fighting the U.S. in the West and the Russians in the east.

I believe this too. That's why I've always told everyone not to hold their breaths about totally pulling out of Iraq or Afghanistan.

Of course, we made it profitable too. Within three months after the invasion of Iraq, they created the Coalition Provisional Authority, which was eventually run by L. Paul Bremer, one of Kissinger's lackeys who used to work for Kissinger while he was Secretary of State and then became Director of Kissinger and Associates before they sent him to Iraq.

The Coalition Provisional Authority opened up foreign investment to Iraq, even though it was against Iraq's law.

No surprise there!

Iran has been attacked by Pakistan in the past. Pakistan was working with Taliban and al Qaeda to do attacks in Iran. But it has allways been the case where the US denied Pakistan was harboring the Taliban and al Qaeda while Bush was in office. I think the raid Obama sent in to get Osama Bin Laden should point out to everyone Pakistan was harboring the Taliban and al Qaeda the whole time. And when Obama called for the invasion of Pakistan to get Osama Bin Laden thier was a lot more than people were told that went on. Jets and helicopters were shot down. The power grid for the city was destroyed. Thier were many hits done on people in Pakistan to get information on the building and Osama Bin Laden including the murder of the man who owned the house a week before the raid. Not to count the CIA agent who was arrested a month or so before for killing two Pakistani Army officers and Hillary Clinton tried to claim he was a diplomat for the embassy even though she knew he was a CIA hit man. Never underestimate what Pakistan could be up to. And don't forget where Osama Bin Laden lived since as erlry as 2003.

Story about attacks in Iran by al Qaeda. The article claims its the same name of the terrorist group but two different groups. Not true just the lie to cover for Pakistan.
www.atimes.com...

Heres a article talking about the terrorist groups from Pakistan plotting and training to do attacks.
www.longwarjournal.org...

Heres a thread I started which uses Pakistani news sources showing what happened during and up to the raid on Osamas compound.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by JoBee


We don't occupy Pakistan.

We maintain minimum forces in Iraq, i.e. no major combat units.

If we go to war with Iran, it will be an air and naval campaign. We won't invade them.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Ok sorry! I should have been clearer... We may not occupy Pakistan, but we do have troops there. We aren't only sending drones in and blowing # up, we have men on the ground. You have feet on the ground your occupying their land. End of story. Don't give me some garbage about how you need a certain amount of people in a country to have it be classified as an occupation. As as for having minimum forces in Iraq, that's true. But we have now established permanent military bases there. Why do you suppose that is... look at it like a game of chess. We are positioning our forces so we make quick work of Iran when we attack them. I do agree with you though on not wanting to send troops into Iran, but on the other hand i think we could say something about them having weapons of mass destruction like we did Iraq and find nothing.

Originally posted by TechniXcality

Originally posted by jhn7537

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by jhn7537

 

Please refer to the United Kingdom as the United Kingdom and not as England.

Or would you prefer I refer to the United States as Texas all the time?



Regards, Skellon.

Sensitive much? Call the United States Texas all you want, it wont bother me one bit. Not sure why someone saying England bothers you....

He must live in one of those countries that were conquered by the British, touchy subject...

Yup, Wales.....

I suggest you consult a map of the world (yes, there are land masses outside of the Americas) and you shall find that the United Kingdom consists of 4 countries, not 1. It is a habitual American slur to regard Britain as 'England'.

It is simply disrespectful to refer to the United Kingdom as England as in doing so, you are dismissing the existence of all Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish people who also represent the United Kingdom.

Tech : It's known as respect, something that your military service should have taught you.


Regards, Skellon.

well i will just post this www.cnn.com... from the link and it should say it all

Some analysts skeptical of alleged Iranian plot

some just some??? wake up and smell the coffee will ya, just once.