Local terror plot suspect described as more a 'joke' than mastermind

reply to post by Corruption Exposed


I dunno.. If you think about it the manner this entire incident was put into place could be brilliant.

Get some clowns to assasinate the Saudi Ambassador in Washington DC and Iran wins.

If those same clowns are caught, Iran has plausible deniability because they are clowns, and as we see now people question the link because of how amateur the operation seemed.

If Iran were to use Quds forces or Iranian intelligence to pull it off and they get caught (assasinating an Ambassador inside the US) they would face a backlash from the UN as well as other countries. It could open the door to not only military actions against Iran, but could cause the Iranian government (Ayatollah / Ahmadenijad) to be assasinated in return.

As it stands now they can deny the accusation, spin it off as some idiots acting on their own and continue on business as usual.

If the US is going to push this, then they are going to need to actually release information, spelling it out from A to Z. Declining to release info is going to be seen with skepticism from enemies and allies alike.

Im curious where this incident is going to end up.

I have repeatedly heard, from both the media talking heads, and many here about the dime-novel or B-film screenplay style of the alleged plot....

Is it going too far to say that this was in fact probably concocted by the same 'creative geniuses' who gave us other stories of our crack federal agents 'thwarting' terrorism in the US?

It looks, sounds, walks, and smells like a duck.... ...weighing the same as the duck means we should burn the accused, no?

Now the real question with a story like this is; who exactly are we accusing? And of what?

As usual, the tale involves the 'play-pretend' game of the federal agents .... why is that almost always the case?

reply to post by hmdphantom


Out of curiousity.

Why do you keep asking the same question in multiple threads?

Just looking for individual answers?, or looking for a debate?

Originally posted by hmdphantom
reply to post by Corruption Exposed

 

I have one question to ask you :

Why did The Iranian Quds force soldiers planned in this period of time , which Iran is trying to affect Arabian Spring ?

Planning a bomb in a foreign country will not help Iran to be effective in Middle East.

Assasinating an Ambassador inside the US would cause tensions between the Us and Saudi. Foreign diplomats are suppose to be protected, regardless of country relations. Kill the Saudi ambassador inside the US and it would create issues.

Saudi has been implementing reforms - allowing women to vote, hold some political offices etc. Those actions will create pressure on the Iranian government from their own people wanting the same.

Iran is torqued about Saudi troops heading into Bahrain to support the government. The majority religion in that country is aligned with Iran, which also is a sticking point for Iran.

There were discussions about Bahrain actually joining with Iran (being annexed), which is another reason Saudi sent troops in to protect the government there.

The US / Saudi have been very vocal about Iran and their military programs.

Factor in the political termoil in Iran (issues between Ahmadenijad / Ayatollah) and you could see this action coming down the pipeline.

Right now Iran denies it all and will use this incident to distract their own people from the internal issues while playing the game of rally 'round the leader.

IF it worked, Iran could use it as propoganda which would satisfy the hard line elements in the government.

In all fairness the argument could be made in reverse, where the US and Saudi organized this in order to distract their population from local issues (as has been suggested by others).

Who knows...


EDIT to ADD -
Feinstein Questions Whether Iran Backing More Plots in Wake of Alleged Assassination Scheme

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

 

According to the White House he was the mastermind in the essence that he is actively engaged in the plot and is organizing it from the USA.

I have no idea what the White House said. They're not exactly known for skillfully crafted off-the-cuff remarks. I'm going by the complaint, which portrays Arbabsiar as a middleman. He was supposed to get CS-1 out of the country to meet a proper handler, but CS-1 refused to go.

Let's make it clear that this whole story is obviously BS. But, let's pretend for just a minute that I'm drinking the Kool Aid and I'm buying into this story such as a gullible fool would. What ties to Iran has the White House established.?

Again, I have no idea what the White House is saying. They should shut up and let the Justice Department do its job. The alleged ties as described in the complaint are that Arbabsiar traveled to Iran, met several people he believed to be in Quds Force, returned home, attempted to hire a cartel hitman, and made several phone calls (some recorded and/or made in the presence of Federal agents) to a number in Iran to discuss the operation. These phone calls resulted in the transfer of $99,920 from a foreign bank account to the confidential source's bank account. When Arbabsiar's personal effects were searched, the FBI discovered an Iranian passport, Iranian currency, and a flight itinerary taking him to Tehran. Arbabsiar also identified a suspected Quds Force officer from a photo lineup and knew his name or alias.

Whether or not you believe this has been "established" is up to you. In a legal sense, these are simply allegations until they are proven in court. But policymakers don't need courts to tell them what's true and what's not, so the administration can carry on as if all the allegations are true. Personally, I've been running over alternate theories, and can't come up with anything stronger than the government's case.

* Confabulator? He had at least one accomplice, and a hundred thousand dollars to spend on his plan. Confabulators lie to get money, they don't spend money to tell lies. A confabulator would've walked into a US intelligence agency long before the plot reached the advanced stage he thought it had, and he would've confessed to making it all up after arrested.

* False flag? Arbabsiar was recruited by a family member he claims is in the Revolutionary Guard, met his handler in Iran, and identified a Quds Force member from a photo array. That's strong evidence false flag recruiting, unless the Revolutionary Guards have been deeply penetrated by a third party. If Arbabsiar himself were flying the false flag, his handlers must have exceptional confidence in him--not only did they trust him with finding a hitman and handling large sums of money, they also divulged the identity of at least one Quds Force officer to him to strengthen his credentials as an Iranian agent if arrested, and they trust him to carry on his deception through interrogation and decades of imprisonment. And they would've had to backstop the heck out of him. All this for a guy who is neither a pillar of moral rectitude nor, as far as anyone can tell, formally trained in tradecraft or interrogation resistance. That is by far the unlikelier scenario.

* Rogue operation? It's possible this was arranged outside the usual Quds Force chain of command. I can't rule that out. It's probably what Iran will claim; they'll use it as an excuse to get rid of a few dangerous officers and officials.

* Completely made up? If it were made up, they wouldn't send it to trial where the evidence will be examined. They would've shot the guy for "resisting arrest" and praised themselves for their vigilance. And if it is completely made up, an innocent man is willingly going to prison. What's more likely, that Arbabsiar offered to hire a hitman for money and national hero status in Iran, or that Arbabsiar offered to be a pariah and go to prison in America?

Originally posted by hmdphantom
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

 

I'm not CE, but if I were to guess I'd say it's a reprisal for Saudi Arabia sending their forces into Bahrain

Politics is not about childish games + planning a bomb in Saudi Arabia embassy will not solve anything.

Reprisals are a fact of life in politics, especially when dealing with countries that use terrorism as their primary means of conducting foreign affairs.

And they were going to bomb a restaurant.

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli


How much is Washington paying you to post on ATS? I mean really, do you always believe the US government's lies?

You are either very misinformed or you have an agenda. Maybe both?

reply to post by NightGypsy

Our government wants so badly to stage another terrorist attack to promote another war, but they are afraid to make it a successful attack with casualties because there's already too many who support a new 9/11 investigation. More casualties would probably cause an uprising that they don't want, so we keep seeing these nonsensical "terrorist plots" that are allegedly thwarted by our "heroes" at the C.I.A.

Bingo! Someone give this person a prize!

Obama and friends know damn well that the logical people with half a working brain will automatically disbelieve any story that comes out of the White House on these issues. So in order not to cause too much unrest where people will revolt, they put out half assed fairy-tales such as this one that the die hard believers will eat up.

They are trying a little to hard to glorify the red white and blue to the supporters of Uncle Sam. It's pretty pathetic if you ask me.

america has become the poor frail bar owner that has to pay the local mafia for "protection" against "bad guys".

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli


" I have no idea what the White House said."

The fact politicians are spinning this case into self serving "news" is a sign whatever happened is being used for propaganda. Recall on 9/11 some guy calling himself president had the case solved before the investigation started.. before the 2nd tower even fell..

Maybe it's not a crime?.. govts, like the US, kill people called 'terrorists' on foreign soil in the name of the war on terror. Could be the Iranian govt felt the target was a threat to their national interests, a terrorist.. Like the Nazis did, they had a lawyer write a tortured logic legal contortion opinion making it legal.

As a matter of fact.. any govt that wants too can fly drones of the US to target threats to their respective interests.. there's a war on terror going on, cant dick around in courts man!..lol.. CIA Drones killing people isn't terrorism because US munitions don't terrorize.. they bombard people with flowers and lady bugs as they're tickled to death.

Originally posted by Truth4Thought
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

 

How much is Washington paying you to post on ATS?

Nothing. I post on ATS because there are occasionally threads that dovetail with my personal and professional interests.

I mean really, do you always believe the US government's lies?

If you have evidence that a lie has been told, feel free to share it.

You are either very misinformed or you have an agenda. Maybe both?

If you have information that I don't, feel free to share it. That's what this web site is all about. "Deny ignorance."

Now, how much is Tehran paying you to post on ATS? Do you always believe the Iranian government's lies? You are either very misinformed or you have an agenda. Maybe both?

here is a published court complaint.

chock full of details.....

"Amended" court complaint



and a few choice excerps from another report.

Terrorist Plot or Terrorist Ploy?

According to Eric Holder, an Iranian contacted a member of the Mexican cartel Los Zetas in May about a plan to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir. Manssor Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen, allegedly also offered to pay the Mexican gang to bomb the Israeli embassy in America, and the Israeli and Saudi embassies in Argentina. However, the Los Zetas connection was an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), who informed the DEA about the offer. In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

Once there, he named Gholam Shakuri, a member of Iran’s Quds Force, as his co-conspirator and made covert calls to Shakuri from prison. (Shakuri is still at large, presumably in Iran.) The administration is designating three other members of Quds as terrorists.

However, the Los Zetas connection was an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)

When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

They can re-route a plane THAT easy ?
It says he already "flew into Mexico!" He must have forgot to get off !
Didn't anybody else notice they were flying the wrong way?


In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral...

If Arbabsiar paid the $100,000, then WHY was HE the "human collateral"?

Perfect patsy set up. More information here.
www.washingtonpost.com...
www.washingtonpost.com...

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

If you have evidence that a lie has been told, feel free to share it.

You must really hate me now. It turns out that even mainstream media is admitting that this plot was a set up by the USA as a carefully placed distraction and not an actual Iranian plot. I was under the impression you believed this was a plot by the Iranian government because of the content you posted.

Will you believe their next lie?

Originally posted by xuenchen
here is a published court complaint.

chock full of details.....

"Amended" court complaint



and a few choice excerps from another report.

Terrorist Plot or Terrorist Ploy?

According to Eric Holder, an Iranian contacted a member of the Mexican cartel Los Zetas in May about a plan to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the United States, Adel al-Jubeir. Manssor Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen, allegedly also offered to pay the Mexican gang to bomb the Israeli embassy in America, and the Israeli and Saudi embassies in Argentina. However, the Los Zetas connection was an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), who informed the DEA about the offer. In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

Once there, he named Gholam Shakuri, a member of Iran’s Quds Force, as his co-conspirator and made covert calls to Shakuri from prison. (Shakuri is still at large, presumably in Iran.) The administration is designating three other members of Quds as terrorists.

However, the Los Zetas connection was an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)

When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

They can re-route a plane THAT easy ?
It says he already "flew into Mexico!" He must have forgot to get off !

Didn't anybody else notice they were flying the wrong way?


In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral...


If Arbabsiar paid the $100,000, then WHY was HE the "human collateral"?

I've been reading the indictment and was having some questions about the logistics of how he was caught; thankfully you put the pieces of the puzzle together!

The FBI has some seriously retarded people coming up with these plots; they can't even get the basics of when the suspect got off a plane correct.

IDIOTS.

Originally posted by GovtFlu
The fact politicians are spinning this case into self serving "news" is a sign whatever happened is being used for propaganda.

Of course politicians are trying to use the events to their advantage. What bearing does that have on the truth or falsehood of the allegations? Wouldn't politicians be more likely to incorporate true facts into their political narrative, knowing that standing on falsehoods could be embarrassing?

Maybe it's not a crime?.. govts, like the US, kill people called 'terrorists' on foreign soil in the name of the war on terror. Could be the Iranian govt felt the target was a threat to their national interests, a terrorist.. Like the Nazis did, they had a lawyer write a tortured logic legal contortion opinion making it legal.

I'm sure it was completely legal under Iranian law. Even commendable. But that doesn't matter. This is the US, and what they attempted to do was illegal under US law. When the Iranian Revolution succeeds in toppling the Great Satan and they establish their particular brand of sharia over this land, then they can say it's not a crime. But I'll be dead before that happens, so I'm not too worried about it.

As a matter of fact.. any govt that wants too can fly drones of the US to target threats to their respective interests.. there's a war on terror going on, cant dick around in courts man!..lol.. CIA Drones killing people isn't terrorism because US munitions don't terrorize.. they bombard people with flowers and lady bugs as they're tickled to death.

Well, no, CIA drones killing people isn't terrorism because the targets are lawful, collateral damage is minimized, and the intent is not to effect political or social change among the civilian populace. If the UAVs were targeting credentialed diplomats of non-hostile states, then maybe it would be terrorism.

Originally posted by xuenchen
When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

They can re-route a plane THAT easy ?

No plane was rerouted. He was denied entrance by Mexican authorities and sent back to the US.

In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral...

If Arbabsiar paid the $100,000, then WHY was HE the "human collateral"?

$1.5 million - $100,000 = ?

reply to post by Drew99GT


I'm glad somebody's actually reading the court complaint !

we can use some citations and analytics.....

because there lies the dog that bites the bone.

The complaint itself may reveal the IQ levels of the real "perpetrators"

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by xuenchen
When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral, the government routed his plane to New York, where federal agents took him into custody.

They can re-route a plane THAT easy ?

No plane was rerouted. He was denied entrance by Mexican authorities and sent back to the US.
[color=;imegreen]I know I know, but the article say different. They are playing a psyop

In August, Arbabsiar wired him a $100,000 down payment on the $1.5 million promised fee. When Arbabsiar flew into Mexico as human collateral...

If Arbabsiar paid the $100,000, then WHY was HE the "human collateral"?

$1.5 million - $100,000 = ?
[color=;imegreen]well, that = $1.4 million...for that kind of money, he could'a used a shill

The whole thing is a rouse.

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by GovtFlu
The fact politicians are spinning this case into self serving "news" is a sign whatever happened is being used for propaganda.

Of course politicians are trying to use the events to their advantage. What bearing does that have on the truth or falsehood of the allegations? Wouldn't politicians be more likely to incorporate true facts into their political narrative, knowing that standing on falsehoods could be embarrassing?
[color=;imegreen]not if their this dumb, or have a hidden agenda.....READ between the lines

Maybe it's not a crime?.. govts, like the US, kill people called 'terrorists' on foreign soil in the name of the war on terror. Could be the Iranian govt felt the target was a threat to their national interests, a terrorist.. Like the Nazis did, they had a lawyer write a tortured logic legal contortion opinion making it legal.

I'm sure it was completely legal under Iranian law. Even commendable. But that doesn't matter. This is the US, and what they attempted to do was illegal under US law. When the Iranian Revolution succeeds in toppling the Great Satan and they establish their particular brand of sharia over this land, then they can say it's not a crime. But I'll be dead before that happens, so I'm not too worried about it.
[color=;imegreen]Gee..WHAT Iranian law would THAT be ?

As a matter of fact.. any govt that wants too can fly drones of the US to target threats to their respective interests.. there's a war on terror going on, cant dick around in courts man!..lol.. CIA Drones killing people isn't terrorism because US munitions don't terrorize.. they bombard people with flowers and lady bugs as they're tickled to death.

Well, no, CIA drones killing people isn't terrorism because the targets are lawful, collateral damage is minimized, and the intent is not to effect political or social change among the civilian populace. If the UAVs were targeting credentialed diplomats of non-hostile states, then maybe it would be terrorism.

[color=;imegreen]Wheeeew