• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran accused over Washington terror plot

We aren't going to get that proof and you know it. That's a specious argument against. To get it would require the cooperation of Iran and they - I'm really going out on limb here - would just tell us to piss off. So we can't get that evidence. Just because we can't get to the proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Modern day terrorists are much like old age pirates and privateers. Pirates worked on their own for their own goals, but privateers worked under the table with a nod and a wink from a government. Privateers received supplies and monetary support from government just like we see now. We see this with the Taliban getting help from Pakistan's ISI. It may go higher than that but we can't be certain. This Iranian terror plot is just another example of privateering.

The advantage of privateering/terrorism is that getting proof of governmental support is damn near impossible. That government can easily disavow any association and the soft-headed will simply accept that denunciation.

A big difference though is that the victims of pirates, or their potential victims, didn't side with the pirates.
 
If he has no evidence, how cna he make any claim at all? Really?

And too many have wagged the dog. But we do need to have evidence to support our claims. So does the president or anyone else. Real evidence.

Easy, he heard it from Holder. Holder is the one claiming this is a plot to kill foreign diplomats and American citizens. Don't you keep up with current events ???

Like I said, if they have evidence, we will eventually see it. The whole thing sounds a bit fishy to me though. That's why I'm wondering if the dog's tail will soon be getting a bit sore.
 
Silly hyperbole doesn't help. Asking for evidence is not the same as saying anyone's name needs cleaning up. War is serious business, so we should make sure we have the facts straight before we go too far down hostile roads.

Ever hear of the Bay of Tonkin? WMDS? It's not like we have a reputation that couldn't use a little cleaning up as well. :coffeepap

It doesn't matter how much vidence there is, the Left is not going to believe it.

Even iif Amadjihad swore on a stack of Korans that he and his government were responsible for the plot the Left would still not believe it possible. Excuses would range from US economic pressure, the usual 'root causes', or that the US was somehow secretly behind it anyway. It would be the same old same old.
 
As soon as you show an ounce of proof that this could even in any way be linked to Israel or Saudi Arabia.
i can't
i can only look at which states would have any motivation to give the appearance that there was a plot to murder the saudi envoy
if there is EVIDENCE that it was iranian government directed, then we have no need to look elsewhere
but from what i have been able to glean, there is no evidence of iranian government involvement. i believe if we had such documentation we would have broadcast it immediately for all the world to see
the absence of such evidence then causes me to wonder which state might have a motivation to effect such a false flag operation

For someone who was throwing out rather bold faced unverified guesses earlier you like to jump up and demand proof from other poeple make their guesses
i get it
your unproven speculation that it is iran trumps my unproven speculation that it could be israel and/or the house of saud
why is that?
 
i can't
i can only look at which states would have any motivation to give the appearance that there was a plot to murder the saudi envoy
if there is EVIDENCE that it was iranian government directed, then we have no need to look elsewhere
but from what i have been able to glean, there is no evidence of iranian government involvement. i believe if we had such documentation we would have broadcast it immediately for all the world to see
the absence of such evidence then causes me to wonder which state might have a motivation to effect such a false flag operation


i get it
your unproven speculation that it is iran trumps my unproven speculation that it could be israel and/or the house of saud
why is that?

\Yeah, sure, it's really Israel behind it all.

Meanwhile, a brief synopsis.

Bolder Iran ups ante in 30-year secret war
 
Easy, he heard it from Holder. Holder is the one claiming this is a plot to kill foreign diplomats and American citizens. Don't you keep up with current events ???

Like I said, if they have evidence, we will eventually see it. The whole thing sounds a bit fishy to me though. That's why I'm wondering if the dog's tail will soon be getting a bit sore.

I thought I was the only one who thought this Iran assassination plot had a "wag the dog" feel to it. But if the 2009 plot is true, who's to say someone within the Iranian gov't wouldn't try it again?
 
Last edited:

Gotcha, so your absolutely baseless accusations which is at least less than what others suggesting Iran have...IE they at least have the Government itself suggesting that it may be the case according to the stories...wasn't something you had to back up, prove, or even give any credible evidence to other than your own opinions. But somehow you're on some kind of high and mighty pedestal to demand that people do what you failed to do initially and have still failed to do and that is produce evidence to back up their claims.

Thanks, glad to have that confirmed.
 
I thought I was the only one who thought this Iran assassination plot had a "wag the dog" feel to it. But if the 2009 plot is true, who's to say someone within the Iranian gov't wouldn't try it again?

Yeah, the whole thing has an odd smell. Obama was briefed on the plot last June and the arrest was made last month, yet we only hear about it yesterday. Why the delay??
 
Napolitano is someone I wouldn't mind being president.

He endorses Ron Paul and majority, if not all his positions. :D

Just look at my sig.
 
\Yeah, sure, it's really Israel behind it all.

Meanwhile, a brief synopsis.

Bolder Iran ups ante in 30-year secret war
great article [/s]
tells us that iranian forces assist forces that are in opposition to israeli/israeli-ally forces
wow. such useful propaganda. the article expresses amazement that the persians of iran would have the temerity to defend their nation's interests
and why would they question USA motives. after all, we only deposed their popular, democratially elected government in 1953. and we replaced him with a despotic ruler. we insist that we support and defend democratically elected governments, but notice how we then topple them. look at allende in argentina, chavez in nicaragua, and hamas in gaza as other prominent examples where we actually exhibit opposition to democratic election results
and our reason for deposing the elected leader of iran. he was going to nationalize the oil holdings in his country and use the proceeds to help his people. big oil could not have that and neither could that democratic USA government. so we toppled him, inserted our puppet and trained savak to repress the iranian opposition

what i find amazing is that the persian people still like and admire America. not so much our government's motivations and actions over there, however
 
Gotcha, so your absolutely baseless accusations which is at least less than what others suggesting Iran have...IE they at least have the Government itself suggesting that it may be the case according to the stories...wasn't something you had to back up, prove, or even give any credible evidence to other than your own opinions. But somehow you're on some kind of high and mighty pedestal to demand that people do what you failed to do initially and have still failed to do and that is produce evidence to back up their claims.

Thanks, glad to have that confirmed.

that government backup you refer to. are you thinking of something on the order of what General Powell presented to the UN to insist there were iraqi WMDs
that excuse to prompt us into war of choice
 
that government backup you refer to. are you thinking of something on the order of what General Powell presented to the UN to insist there were iraqi WMDs
that excuse to prompt us into war of choice

I'm talking about something that even if its 1% trustable is still 1% greater than any evidence you have for it being the Saudi's or Israeli's.
 
I'm talking about something that even if its 1% trustable is still 1% greater than any evidence you have for it being the Saudi's or those sneaky Isreali's
remember, Powell insisted that his evidence was 100% solid
trust ... but verify
i will wait until i see evidence if the iranian wrongdoing before i jump to that conclusion
but as an advocate of the oppressive government of israel, i can see why you and those like you would want to trigger an action to take out iran's nuclear capabilities
no matter how illegitimate that basis of attack might be
 
remember, Powell insisted that his evidence was 100% solid

So....? What the **** does that have to do with it.

Yeah, powell said 100% solid. I'm saying even if we consider the current evidence 1% solid that's STILL more solid than what you've put forth.

i will wait until i see evidence if the iranian wrongdoing before i jump to that conclusion

And yet you had no problem leaping to make the suggestion that you wouldn't be surprised if its Isreal or Saudi's and suggesting its likely to be the latter. Even though there's LESS evidence out there suggesting that.

but as an advocate of the oppressive government of israel,

But as a detractor of the the continually dmeonized government of israel....

Sorry, engaging in the same idiotic tactics as you.

Here's the funny thing too. I'm actually rather neutral to ambivilent towards Israel.

i can see why you and those like you would want to trigger an action to take out iran's nuclear capabilities

The ****? Nice strawman. I've not suggested at all that we should take any action again Iran. I'd like to see more information as well. My only issue was with your asinine and ignorant accusations that you threw out earlier in this thread mixed with your holier than thou attitude demanding "evidence" for people when you don't get close to holding yourself to that standard.

Where the **** have I suggested in any way, shape, or form we take action against Iran for this? Please, link me...or are you just using your prejudices of anyone who dares to suggest that you can't attack the Joos for everything immeidetely and who isn't a hyper partisan liberal and proscribing thoughts, actions, and statements to me that I've never got CLOSE to making?
 
I think it's safe to say the US would be pissed at ANYONE who tries to kill ANY DIPLOMAT on US soil.

Hmm So who did it? Let's Make a Deal and look at our likely suspects:

Door #1: Israel - Depends much on US monetary, diplomatic, and military support. Would really lose a lot by endangering the relationship
Door #2: Saudi Arabia - Depends much on US monetary support. Just starting a $30 Billion dollar contract to get advanced F-15s. In their interests to stay nice.
Door #3: Iran - Positively despises the US. It's Anti-US vitriol is near-constant without the slightest hint of diplomacy. Cares nothing for what the US thinks. Opposes every single US interest in the middle-east. Opposes the US at every turn in the UN. Threatens to patrol in US waters with cruise missiles.

Gosh, Wayne, I think I'll take Door #3.
 
So....? What the **** does that have to do with it.

Yeah, powell said 100% solid. I'm saying even if we consider the current evidence 1% solid that's STILL more solid than what you've put forth.



And yet you had no problem leaping to make the suggestion that you wouldn't be surprised if its Isreal or Saudi's and suggesting its likely to be the latter. Even though there's LESS evidence out there suggesting that.
i forgot, your position holds 1% more evidence than does mine ... according to your baseless math (you failed to show your work)
if the iranians are not behind this plot, then the states which are will be delighted for all of the lemmings to support an action against iran for that 1% proof
santayana was correct. those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it
but are those lemmings so afflicted with dementia that they cannot recall the lies told to them to support an attack on iraq



But as a detractor of the the continually dmeonized government of israel....

Sorry, engaging in the same idiotic tactics as you.

Here's the funny thing too. I'm actually rather neutral to ambivilent towards Israel.



The ****? Nice strawman. I've not suggested at all that we should take any action again Iran. I'd like to see more information as well. My only issue was with your asinine and ignorant accusations that you threw out earlier in this thread mixed with your holier than thou attitude demanding "evidence" for people when you don't get close to holding yourself to that standard.

Where the **** have I suggested in any way, shape, or form we take action against Iran for this? Please, link me...or are you just using your prejudices of anyone who dares to suggest that you can't attack the Joos for everything immeidetely and who isn't a hyper partisan liberal and proscribing thoughts, actions, and statements to me that I've never got CLOSE to making?

you want to only comment on a portion of what i have to say
my belief is that this is a false flag effort by states antagonistic toward iran - IF - it cannot be proven that iran was behind this plot
and if there is no evidence to show iran was behind the plot then we must examine the motivations of those other states who would want to see iran's nuclear capacity taken out by the very nation which would have been embarrassed if such plot had succeeded
 
i forgot, your position holds 1% more evidence than does mine ... according to your baseless math (you failed to show your work)
if the iranians are not behind this plot, then the states which are will be delighted for all of the lemmings to support an action against iran for that 1% proof

I think you presume too much to believe this will be an excuse for strikes on Iran. People hated that we provided the minimal support we gave Libya. They won't accept this at all. If an attack on Iran is your main worry, don't. It won't happen.
 
i forgot, your position holds 1% more evidence than does mine ... according to your baseless math (you failed to show your work)

I have shown evidence, pointing to the various government reports in this thread. You don't like the validity of that evidence, and that's fine...more power to you. But that doesn't change the fact there's actual stated evidence out there that at least points towards the notion it was Iranian backed.

You however have shown NOTHING. No government source, no investigtative source, NOTHING...NOTHING linking it to Iran.

You attempted to suggest my evidence didn't really exist because the government stated it, which is idiotic. The 1% was stating that even if we're to believe the government is untrustworthy 99% or the time that it still means its trustworthy 1% of the time which is more trustworthy than any evidence you've put forward. Even if we said the government was untrustworthy 99.999999999% of the time that 0.000000001% is still more evidence than you have.

What I am saying is that those saying it was Iran have presented at least SOME form of evidence that is more than just their opinion. You may not LIKE that evidence, but its still there. YOU however have provied nothing

my belief is that this is a false flag effort by states antagonistic toward iran

Your belief, which is based on zero bits of factual evidence regarding the case and is even less legitimate than the opinions of those who you're lambasting to give you Proof.
 
I think you presume too much to believe this will be an excuse for strikes on Iran. People hated that we provided the minimal support we gave Libya. They won't accept this at all. If an attack on Iran is your main worry, don't. It won't happen.

i have reason to worry. so does every American who does not want our country involved in another baseless military action, as was the circumstance in iraq
if this was not iran behind the plot, what reason do we have to believe that the state(s) behind the false flag will not make another attempt to provoke our retaliation against iran
 
I have shown evidence, pointing to the various government reports in this thread. You don't like the validity of that evidence, and that's fine...more power to you. But that doesn't change the fact there's actual stated evidence out there that at least points towards the notion it was Iranian backed.

You however have shown NOTHING. No government source, no investigtative source, NOTHING...NOTHING linking it to Iran.

You attempted to suggest my evidence didn't really exist because the government stated it, which is idiotic. The 1% was stating that even if we're to believe the government is untrustworthy 99% or the time that it still means its trustworthy 1% of the time which is more trustworthy than any evidence you've put forward. Even if we said the government was untrustworthy 99.999999999% of the time that 0.000000001% is still more evidence than you have.

What I am saying is that those saying it was Iran have presented at least SOME form of evidence that is more than just their opinion. You may not LIKE that evidence, but its still there. YOU however have provied nothing



Your belief, which is based on zero bits of factual evidence regarding the case and is even less legitimate than the opinions of those who you're lambasting to give you Proof.

ok, i'll play (gladly)

show us the evidence that iran is behind this plot
 
ok, i'll play (gladly)

show us the evidence that iran is behind this plot

As already stated (but you know that, you're just playing dumb), its in the OP

The US says it has broken up a major terrorist plot in which agents linked to Iran sought to assassinate Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the US and bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington.

US authorities say the scheme called for the assassination of the Saudi envoy in a bomb attack which could have killed many other people and would have been just "the opening act" to a "well-funded and chilling plot" directed by factions of the Iranian government.

Now, you don't think its good evidence because U.S. officials are making the accusation and nothing more. And you know what, I agree. Its not strong evidence, its heresay based on the words of a US official.

HOWEVER

Its still a **** ton more than the big fat ZERO you've been able to provide suggesting in any way, shape, or form that this was MOSSAD or the Saudi's.

All I'm saying is before you get on your high horse and start ranting at people to provide you sources and proof and evidence you should make sure your own ass didn't start trying to make accusations and suggestions and statements while providing even less sources than the ones you're ranting at have.

You want to make baseless accusations based on your "opinion", which you obviously value immensely, that's fine...but don't get on other people for making slightly less baseless ones as well.
 
Last edited:
As already stated (but you know that, you're just playing dumb), its in the OP



Now, you don't think its good evidence because U.S. officials are making the accusation and nothing more. And you know what, I agree. Its not strong evidence, its heresay based on the words of a US official.

HOWEVER

Its still a **** ton more than the big fat ZERO you've been able to provide suggesting in any way, shape, or form that this was MOSSAD or the Saudi's.

All I'm saying is before you get on your high horse and start ranting at people to provide you sources and proof and evidence you should make sure your own ass didn't start trying to make accusations and suggestions and statements while providing even less sources than the ones you're ranting at have.

You want to make baseless accusations based on your "opinion", which you obviously value immensely, that's fine...but don't get on other people for making slightly less baseless ones as well.

so, you have nothing
well nothing more than the UN had when Powell insisted that we had reliable evidence of WMDs in iraq
 
if this was not iran behind the plot, what reason do we have to believe that the state(s) behind the false flag will not make another attempt to provoke our retaliation against iran

Not that I believe it wasn't Iran, but I'll play along for the moment...

The thing I wonder about this plot is: what if we didn't find out about it? What if it worked to perfection? Well, then we wouldn't have any evidence. We'd have no accused to confess and no phone calls from any Quds member. We'd have almost nothing and almost no one to pin it on.

So if you wanted to make sure evidence was left behind, you would have to either: 1) make sure the plot fails, or 2) leave a trail of breadcrumbs. Either one leaves a trail, and leaving a "false" trail is a trail all by itself. I'm not saying it's perfect or flawless, but the idea of "framing" a person or even a country is hardly new. I don't think anyone in the government is happy being another country's lackey. You can be sure we don't want to play that game.
 
Those folks that certain, or at least convinced that Iran had nothing to with it: what are you basing your opinion on?

So far I've heard, "Iran isn't that clumsy", parroted fairly regular. On what evidence is that claim being based?
 
Last edited:
Those folks that certain, or at least convinced that Iran had nothing to with it: what are you basing your opinion on?

So far I've heard, "Iran isn't that clumsy", parroted fairly regular. On what evidence is that claim being based?

What's your reasoning against it? "They're this clumsy because they're Iran?"
 
Back
Top Bottom