Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Pages

• Home
• Photo Gallery
• Advertising
• Comment Rules
• Subscribe to Posts (per post)
• Tikun Olam Store
• Donate
• Subscribe (daily digest)
• Contact
• About
• Monthly archives
• Terms of Use

8 Responses to “Justice Department Concedes: No ‘Conclusive Proof’ Linking Senior Iranian Officials to Terror Plot”

1. Johnboy says:

   October 13, 2011 at 3:27 AM

   Exactly so: everything hinges upon the claim that Gholam Shakuri is a senior operative in the Qods Force, because it is painfully obvious that Arbabsiar is a rank amateur and the Mexican drug cartels have no prior affiliation with Iran.

   The claim that Shakuri is a professional spook with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards is being repeated like a mantra, but so far I have seen exactly zero evidence to support it.

   Reply
2. Justice Department Concedes: No ‘Conclusive Proof’ Linking Senior Iranian Officials To Terror Plot - OpEd says:

   October 13, 2011 at 7:47 AM

   [...] article appeared at Tikun Olam About the [...]

   Reply
3. PersianAdvocate says:

   October 13, 2011 at 8:51 AM

   Seems like sticks and carrots are exactly what are being used by some factor to keep the Administration in check. That is more likely than this plot fabrication.

   Reply
4. fiddler says:

   October 13, 2011 at 9:14 AM

   Then there’s also the insight offered by experts on those drug cartels: that the allegedly $1.5 million offered for the hit job was pocket money for them, especially with such a high-level target.

   This means that the Obama administration is expecting the American people, or those who care about this at any rate, to believe merely on the basis of its suppositions that Iran’s most senior leaders would have to have known about a plot like this. Why? On what basis?

   On the same basis the sheeple and their MSM shepherds could reasonably be expected to believe everything they were told about Iraqi WMDs, Jose Padilla, the “worst of the worst” at Gitmo, and Anwar al-Awlaki. If the Beloved Leader says it, it must be true, and to even question Him amounts to defatism. We’re At War, after all.

   Reply
5. pabelmont says:

   October 13, 2011 at 11:21 AM

   ““It would be our assessment that this kind of operation would have been discussed at the highest levels of the regime,” said a senior American official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the government’s analysis.” Not authorized to speak, but speaks. Maybe he’s a member of a cabal inside the USA government which has rather lousy trade-craft. Why should we believe his “assessment” when he’s obviously either a self-appointed leaker or a government-sponsored propagandist.

   Reply
   • fiddler says:

     October 14, 2011 at 1:31 PM

     “Self-appointed leaker” is a rather graceless synonym for “whistleblower”, one that proponents of secret government would use. Lack of authorisation to speak absolutely does not make someone’s testimony unreliable. But this is hardly the case here, is it?
     “Government propagandist” fits much better, imo. You can’t miss the number, impossible to count, of anonymous (i.e. unaccountable) “leaks” of government claims in the media these days. That’s simply the form govt propaganda has taken nowadays, with full complicity of the media.

     Reply
6. Bob Reynolds says:

   October 14, 2011 at 3:29 AM

   After 9-11 the CIA recruited Hollywood script writers
   to come up with terrorist plots so the CIA might anticipate
   future terrorist actions.

   Its good to see they found some use for the scripts.

   Reply
7. Windows on Iran Update – 10 « Windows on Iran says:

   October 20, 2011 at 12:34 PM

   [...] alleged terrorist here, one on the Justice department conceding “no conclusive proof” here. And the third, an interesting analysis by the ex-CIA officer [...]

   Reply