The Federal Prosecutor doesn’t seem to be immune to the mania. The first count of the DOJ complaint is “Conspiracy to Murder A Foreign Official.”
Printable View
The Federal Prosecutor doesn’t seem to be immune to the mania. The first count of the DOJ complaint is “Conspiracy to Murder A Foreign Official.”
I'll just let Henry Rollins serenade y'all absorb the tidbits down below.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...79B4YA20111012Quote:
"It strikes me that Iran and the Quds Force would not conduct a mission like this. It's possible but unlikely," said Dubai-based defense analyst Theodore Karasik.
"It doesn't fit the modus operandi of the Quds Force or Iranian intelligence services. If it was true, it would be one of the most botched operations of its kind."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...343308154.htmlQuote:
President Barack Obama was first briefed on the alleged plot in June and directed government agencies to support the investigation, U.S. officials said.
http://blog.heritage.org/2011/10/12/...ranian-threat/Quote:
It is being reported that following the charges against Iran, the Obama Administration is seeking to use the development as leverage to “unite the world” against Iran, with Vice President Biden saying, “That’s the surest way to be able to get results.”
A viewpoint from Australia:http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/...rug-baron.aspx
Ends with:Quote:
The most intriguing issue is not so much the brazenness of the plot but the absolute amateurishness of it.....
...given this was perhaps the boldest offensive action ever carried out by Iranian intelligence, why were the communications conducted using an open mobile direct from the US to 'senior Quds Force members' in downtown Tehran? And why were the down-payments wired directly into the cartel's nominated bank account from overseas?
Quote:
It is too early to tell what the truth is, but I have some sympathy for Hillary Clinton's argument that 'You couldn't make this up, could you?'.
While we may never know the the true facts of this little operation, I do think that the US would be well served by not coming out too terribly strongly about a country that conducts an operation against a person they have deemed to be a High Value Target who just happens to be enjoying sanctuary within the borders of a sovereign third party nation at the time of the operation without the express authorization and approval of said operation by that violated 3rd party.
Never know when we will launch our next operation along those same lines; certainly the President hangs much of his hopes for re-election upon the results of the last one.
Once Pandora's box is opened, regardless of reason, all manner of problems will emerge.
(And I hate to think how we might have reacted if Pakistani security forces had acted to "thwart" our operation on bin Laden...)
Very good point.
But, and I am not trying to be stroppy, if this thing, or something like it had actually been carried out, it would be a violation of our sovereignty. Wouldn't we have to do something?
Just an aside to an aside, I don't think there was any danger at all the Pak Army was going to thwart that op. I think they knew it was coming and made damn sure they were looking the other way.
One of many such articles, but maybe of interest for American readers:Link:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...ssination-plotQuote:
The affair leaves several questions unanswered.
InSightCrime, 9 April 2014: Terrorism and Crime in the Americas - "It's Business"
Quote:
...If we were to put a label on any of this activity, it would probably be just that: it's business. These interactions appear to be, more than anything else, a way to achieve short-term monetary goals. Drug trafficking, contraband, weapons trafficking, diamond smuggling and numerous other activities help the terrorist groups reach these goals. Intermediaries like Harb and Joumaa facilitate these deals and perhaps have some ideological affinity to one or more of these organizations. But this does not mean these organizations have developed longstanding or even short-term working relationships. Security analyst Douglas Farah has aptly described them as "one-night stands."...