Trouble is, the very same facts that make this scheme absurd make it plausible. There is an element in Iranian power that suffers from religious psychosis. They seem to sincerely believe that if they can just start The Shit, Allah will intervene on their behalf. OK, that’s nuts.
But people who actually believe such utter rot won’t care about getting caught, and are probably not the smartest kids in the room to start with.
So, sure, this scheme is nuts. So was hijacking airplanes with box cutters and flying them into buildings. And that one worked!
Oh, well, if you put it LIKE that… then, off with their heads.
:rolleyes:
Trouble is there are no facts on this case. And secondly, I can make exactly same argument on religious psychosis and blame Israelis for car-bombing Lebanese PM (or was it ex-PM). Hmm… on a second thought, this even makes more sense…
Unless you go by the legal meaning of the word entrapment. If the guy drives the planning of the crime at all stages, it isn’t entrapment for the government to make him think he has an opportunity to do it.
I am not so sure that just because an operation is bungled means that it could not be done by an otherwise professional [competent?] organisation.
Al Queda was responsible for 9/11. They got 20 people into the U.S., bankrolled them, and ensured that their activities were coordinated so that the highjackings were all relatively simultaneous. This was all done without any of the U.S. governmental intelligence services (FBI, CIA, DoD, etc) from catching on to the plot until after the fact.
And yet, a couple years later, we have attacks from that same organisation that involve low levels dudes trying to light their sneakers (or their boxer shorts) with matches to blow up aircraft.
Some organisation, but different levels of competency.
For example, the ATF, despite being an organisation that is generally considered a reasonably well trained and professional one, seems to have botched the “Operation Fast and Furious” situation.
Short reply: I don’t find it unbelievable that Iran could have fouled up. Whether they actually attempted to kill the Saudi Ambassador, I have no idea. But the level of incompentency, if any, is not in of itself proof that it didn’t try it.
(Edit: Sorry. I see this point has already been proposed.)
To avoid being found to having entrapped somebody to commit a crime, law enforcement agencies have to prove that the suspect was predisposed to commit the crime and wasn’t pushed into it by the Feds. This has not been the case in previous sting operations like this one :
Time and again, the FBI concocts a Terrorist attack, infiltrates Muslim communities in order to find recruits, persuades them to perpetrate the attack, supplies them with the money, weapons and know-how they need to carry it out — only to heroically jump in at the last moment, arrest the would-be perpetrators whom the FBI converted, and save a grateful nation from the plot manufactured by the FBI. Last year, the FBI subjected 19-year-old Somali-American Mohamed Osman Mohamud to months of encouragement, support and money and convinced him to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas event in Portland, Oregon, only to arrest him at the last moment and then issue a Press Release boasting of its success. In late 2009, the FBI persuaded and enabled Hosam Maher Husein Smadi, a 19-year old Jordanian citizen, to place a fake bomb at a Dallas skyscraper and separately convinced Farooque Ahmed, a 34-year-old naturalized American citizen born in Pakistan, to bomb the Washington Metro. And now, the FBI has yet again saved us all from its own Terrorist plot by arresting 26-year-old American citizen Rezwan Ferdaus after having spent months providing him with the plans and materials to attack the Pentagon, American troops in Iraq, and possibly the Capitol Building using “remote-controlled” model airplanes carrying explosives.
None of these cases entail the FBI’s learning of an actual plot and then infiltrating it to stop it. They all involve the FBI’s purposely seeking out Muslims (typically young and impressionable ones) whom they think harbor animosity toward the U.S. and who therefore can be induced to launch an attack despite having never taken even a single step toward doing so before the FBI targeted them.
The Israelis have done the same thing previously and been caught doing it. They basically don’t giv e ashit whether they get caught or not. This isn’t just any old assasination. This is an assasination in America by a country that’s constantly threatened with attack by the American government. Nobody in their right mind is going to do this. And the top Iranians are all in their right minds. They’re far smarter at foreign policy than our guys as the events of the past few years have clearly demonstrated. They’ve said time and again they’ll never attack another country unless they’re attacked themselves. This plot is just too nuts for words.
If you want to argue the FBI has gone after some seriously low hanging fruit with regard to terrorism lately, I won’t argue with you. That said, Hosam Maher Husein Smadi plead guilty to a charge of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and the other cases have not gone to trial yet. When you say law enforcement has not proved the suspect was predisposed to commit the crime, you’re going to have to explain how they failed to prove it.
Yeah, they entrapped him into setting off a truck bomb and then charge him with trying to set off a weapon of mass destruction. A truck bomb is not a weapon of mass destruction although that bit sounds great on the TV when they announce that they’ve foiled a dastardly plot that they set up themselves.
The crucial conversation they have with the guy, the one they say proves they didn’t entrap him, they lost the recording of. Complete and utter bullshit from start to finish. You basically have hundreds or thousands of undercover Feds right now trying to set up dumb teenagers and young men all over America to become terrorist masterminds so that the government can claim that they’re doing something useful.
The IRA actually used to do the same thing to dumb Irish kids. They’d find kids they could take advantage who were furious at the brits for whatever reason and had no fathers or guidance and befriend them then use them to plant bombs, carry weapons or money or whtever. Basically take all the risks. This used to be described by the Brits as the most cowardly of all actions. OK, OK, not an exact mirror image here, the FBI aren’t terrorists, but the thinking behind the Feds’ actions and the IRA’s actions is equally squalid.
Ask the FBI. They said they didn’t entrap the kid but they say they’ve lost the only bit of evidence that they say proves they didn’t entrap him. Obviously they’re not expecting any problems getting convictions despite the fact that they can’t prove they didn’t entrap him. And that’s going to be the case. Juries are going to hear the suspect/s planted what he thought was a truck/suitcase/chenical/whatever bomb and find them guilty. they’re not going to worry about technicalities like entrapment.
I am asking you about your proof that “law enforcement has not proved the suspect was predisposed to commit the crime” when one of the defendants you mentioned plead guilty and the other two haven’t gone to trial yet.
I don’t know. I’m asking you how the government failed to prove something when it looks like they’ve succeeded once and not gotten to that point yet in two other cases. Like I said, these guys seem to be idiots and that may be the case with this Iran thing, too. But the fact that they’re idiots who went for a sting operation doesn’t mean the government entrapped them. I’m thinking the problem is that people keep using “entrapment” as a legal term when that’s not what happened.
I’ve been struggling with this. This seems too wacky for country whose MO is to do things carefully and coldly with a long-term view. It just seems so out of character…I’ve argued about this on the board that Iran only wants to fabricate the components for a bomb, but not to actually put it all together. It would induce an nuclear arms races with Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Neither will tolerate a nuclear Iran for very long.
But one thing crossed my mind yesterday. Assuming that it was the leadership that approved the assassination, then the political calculus changes 180 degrees. This means that they believe they can get away with it even if they were caught. If your caught you gain two advantages: 1) The US can scream and shout all it wants, but it in itself is not enough for the US to go to war; 2) you score points with the rest of the world that Iran is an up and coming underdog that is willing to risk military action standing up to a super power (re: anybody remember Iran sending naval ships to east coast of the US? Does anyone think that this was a coincidence?).
And since Iran has only become stronger as a regional power since 9/11, while US influence has weakened (no thanks to the incompetence of the Bush Administration), I can’t totally discount that Iran’s leadership would pull off a stunt like this. Remember, Iran’s long-term strategic goal is to become the principle power broker in the Middle East, weakening American and Saudi influence in the region is part of this process. By engaging in this behavior, they’re letting everyone know who the real regional power is. And remonstrating once again that Iran, and not the US, is calling the shots in the Middle East.
Assuming that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered the hit, what exactly are we going to do to Iran? Bomb it? Assassinate the Ayatollah? Blow up a Quds base? A violent action against Iran would work in Iran’s favor in the short and long-term; the US would immediately be seen as yet making another move against the Muslim world–nobody in the world would care that a few US senators got blown up real good–they rational would be “paybacks a bitch” after what you did to Iraq. Which leaves the US three viable options (YMMV): 1) turn the screws on Iran’s international financial transactions, 2) step up clandestine warfare internally and externally with Iran and its proxies, and in the most extreme case, 3) launch an embargo on the export of Iran’s petroleum. None of these are a magic bullet which will bring down Iran as a major power. China won’t stand for the third (even if the Saudi’s promise to make up for it), because if Saudi oil fields were destroyed by Iran, then what? The current power structure in the PRC is dependent on the Chinese citizen’s believing that the future will better than now; even the chance of Iran falling under the American sphere of influence is not something the PRC is going to risk, ever. In fact, as far as China is concerned, in the long term, a weakened American influence in the Middle East would be to their strategic advantage.
Unless the US can convince everyone else that Iran is a major global threat to political stability, I just don’t see much that we can do–even if it turns out to be ordered from the top. Outside of whacking a few high ranking individuals in Iran who were involved, we’ve reaped the whirlwind when we put Afghanistan on the back-burner and invaded Iraq.
Because, under all the man made clutter, he’s the exact same God as the one Jews and Christians have tried for centuries to kill everybody ELSE over… Seems he approves of every bit of evil done in his name, doncha know?.. Ya just have to find the right Imam/Priest/Pastor/Rabbi/Minister to agree with you, and you’ll get an authentic gold plated “go to Paradise free” pass… :eek:
What the Arab countries really need to do is all band together to become the United States of Arabia, and bomb the SHIT out of the USA massacring millions of men, women and children in the process. Bomb them back to the stone age. The bigger they are, the more damage will be caused when they fall - look at the world trade centre for example. What the Arabs should have done was follow that up with more **** just as bad. Not go on the backfoot and allow the US to come in with their dirty bombs and massacring tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children.
The USA is a dangerous nuclear country and a menace to the peace and stability of the world. Take all of their nuclear weapons and materials from them. Say they are Christian fundamentalists and point to various quotes made by presidents over the years about Christianity and god… it wouldn’t be far off when you look at the senile old fools and soulless penpushers like the crazy man John Bolton that come on Fox News sometimes trying to argue pro-war.
