It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TA-THREATS: Former Iranian Shah Official Warns U.S. of Terrorist Attack.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Ever since February of 2003, U.S. Rep Congressman Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania had secret meetings with a former Shah official of the Iranian government. Other information the former Shah official has given to the U.S. Congressman, have successfully predicted many of the activities of the Iranian government, from Iran's nuclear programs to the regimen support of terrorism, including Al Qaeda. According to the informant, whom Weldon nicknamed "Ali", the information he is recieving comes directly from two sources inside the mullah's inner circle, and according to the information given by this former Iranian official, there is an Iranian terrorist cell that has planned to hijack Canadian airliners, and use them to crash them against the Seabrook reactor in New Hampshire. According to "Ali", the attack was first planned to be executed between November 23 and December 3 of 2003, but then it was postponed for after the U.S. presidential elections. Weldon has been warning the U.S. intelligence community for over a year of this terrorist threat, but according to the Congressman his efforts to quietly warn the intelligence community came to nothing, and he has decided to make the information public, and even publish a book where he gives details of the intelligence he has collected on this Iranian attack on the U.S.
 



www.nysun.com
"I get a lot of wackos who come to see me, who claim to have information," he said. "In this case, this source came to me from a former member of Congress, a Democrat. I followed up a lead. That lead developed an ongoing process of information-sharing for two years that I took to the highest levels of the intelligence community."

In Washington, the new book from Mr. Weldon, based in part on his meetings with Ali, will provide fresh ammunition for the Republicans against an intelligence community perceived by the White House as hostile to the president's policies.

The congressman's experience with America's spy service in the last year echoes frustrations from other American officials and analysts who have cultivated Iranians willing to provide America with intelligence, but who have been ignored. After a December 2001 meeting in Rome between Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin and Iran-Contra figure Manucher Ghorbanifar, the State Department and CIA went out of their way to shut down the channel. Mr. Franklin is now the target of a grand jury investigation into alleged espionage activities for passing information to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

A summary of Ali's predictions were outlined in a November 2003 letter to the Republican chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Roberts from Kansas. In its opening lines, Mr. Weldon wrote, "This letter is to warn you of an intelligence failure in the process of happening."



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Are we being duped into taking action against Iran, or is this truly reliable information that the intelligence community of the U.S. should follow up?

I am not sure what to make of this information, but I'll rather this information is taken into account, that it's investigated, and later proven wrong, than to the possibility of having information of another terrorist plot against the U.S. like the attack of 9/11, or worse, being ignored, and later find out that the information was correct.

Related News Links:
www.nti.org
regimechangeiran.blogspot.com
www.memri.org


[edit on 16-12-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Dec, 15 2004 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I dont think people in America are going to let anyone Hijack a plane again. The next time it is tried about 200 people are going to rush the terrorist before then even get to the cockpit door.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Diplomancy in war ... what a concept....
The reason that we really don't have to worry about this happening from a foreign power or state sponsored terrorist group, is due to it being nuclear...
any country that uses nuclear attack (in any form) on the US would be a big glowing hole shortly thereafter...
it is called MAD (mutually assured desruction)... except if the attacking country blew its load in one sweep of airplane bombs hitting nuke facilites... then it would be a merceless destruction of an entire country. In other words... Iran knows better than to do something like this now, because we have been warned... we would know it was them... and they would know that they be kissin there sweet little *$*%$ goodbye...



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I don't buy it for a minute. An obvious sales pitch to justify war against Iran.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   


I dont think people in America are going to let anyone Hijack a plane again.


Reading comprehention please..... The story says Hijacking of a Canadian aircraft



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib


Are we being duped into taking action against Iran, or is this truly reliable information that the intelligence community of the U.S. should follow up?



Wasnt the attack on Iraq preceeded by Iraqi exiles from the Iraqi government proclaiming they had nuclear capabilities and were just hiding them under swimmingpools? Sounds like the same type of thing to me.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I remember reading before that if Bush was elected again, there was definitely going to be some kind of military action against Iran. They are perhaps attempting to build some kind of case against Iran, but, if they are saying a terrorist attack, you know what that means. They will make it happen again.

It'll be another conspiracy by the Globalists, and those who control the major operations of significant terrorist attacks.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
I don't buy it for a minute. An obvious sales pitch to justify war against Iran.


Yup your right Indy in a sick way of thinking this should be ignored by our intelligence services until such time that it actually occurs and we see real people on television dead or dying of radiation sickness around the nuclear plant intended for attack, better yet scenes of children being given iodine tablets to prevent thyroid cancer hundreds of miles from the epicenter and the entailing controversy when its found there is a shortage in the supply due to the chaos of evacuation. Yup another dig in the making at the Bush administration if I do say so myself.

Of course there will be the usual rumblings that the administration let the attack happen to hasten war against Iran or even better for conspiracy is the predictable assertions that a "wag the dog" campaign was in play meaning all the television news was faked to justify going to war with Iran. This will of course lead to another 9/11 style hearing where critics of the administration can claim negligence by Bush for ignoring signs of an impending attack.

Yup - damned if you do, damned if you don't

Sarcasm off

Would it not be more appropiate to run down each and every rumor of attack no matter how small or large the chance of it happening was.

After 9/11 it seems that we should take the intelligence failures seriously and allow our services to do their jobs without all this second guessing and hand wringing, nor allow political affiliation within these agencies to color the end result of the various expert reports.

Ignoring possibilities is NOT what we as taxpayers pay for when funding intelligence apparatus.

Running down leads warranted or not to their furthest point possible until they either have credibility or not IS what we pay for.

The lack of action in respect to the mission of the intell services seems to be the chief complaint of congressman Weldon and should be a concern to all.

It was and still is intelligence failures that led to the 9/11 attack and the WMD information on Iraq precipitating real action on a rather long running problem to begin with.





[edit on 16-12-2004 by Phoenix]



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indy
I don't buy it for a minute. An obvious sales pitch to justify war against Iran.


I'm tilting toward this assessment too

but

theres' 2 SRPs, one in AZ the Salt River Project
the other SRP is the one in SC the Savannah River Plant

one SRP is more famous as a nuke weapons plant

? why, among all values of targets, would Seabrook NH be tops?...OR
did they get the code-words skewed up....like they did on the
White Palace / White Phallus remarks on 9-11.......oh well, here we go again



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kidfinger

Wasnt the attack on Iraq preceeded by Iraqi exiles from the Iraqi government proclaiming they had nuclear capabilities and were just hiding them under swimmingpools? Sounds like the same type of thing to me.


First of all this is about Iran, but since you want to mention Iraq.... How can anyone think that Saddam wasn't hidding illegal programs with all the hide and seek he played?..... knowing what would happen if he did so, and now we know that many nations in the UN were doing illegal activities with Iraq, including selling banned weaponry and parts using the food-for-oil program.... Even UNMOVIC was being paid with the money from the food-for-oil program...and everyday we find how many nations and members of the UN were making money off this program.....

Now about Iran.... There have been many threats from Iran directly, and one of the things they have said is that they have 29 targets picked in the U.S and other countries in the west, ready to attack whenever they want to..... I gave links to some of the threats Iran have given against the U.S and the west in general.

What I want to know is if this information in specific is true, and if so i hope the terrorist cell is caught as soon as possible.

[edit on 16-12-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I don't know anything about the Seabrook in NH, but it seems like the general strategy -- trigger a nuclear disaster ala chernobyl by crashing into a nuclear power plant -- depends on using planes coming in from over the border. There's not that many nuke plants near the borders that I know of -- the SRP in AZ, actually, runs the Palo Verde nuclear power plant in AZ, it's not super-near the border (it's in about the center-northwest of the state -- so given their options the seabrook reactor may just be the easiest target to hit.

i'm skeptical about iran wanting to launch a terror attack on us at the moment -- so far as I can tell the US is spoiling for a reason to justify invading, but Iran really does seem to be doing everything reasonable to avoid a conflict at the moment. the us/iran hostility is pretty harsh, but i'd be surprised if the iranian leadership thought it in their best interest to provoke actual conflict at the moment...my guess is they'll try to lay low until their nuke program's far enough along that they have more leverage than they do now, although I don't know what to make of the reports of their helping out the insurgents in iraq.

so, i'm skeptical about iran encouraging this right now -- though now that i think about it i wouldn't put it past them to have plans like this "ready to go" in case of a us offensive (it's what i'd do if i was in their shoes) -- the actual attack seems pretty easy to pull off, unfortunately. i've thought that palo verde was an obvious choice for a similar attack because it's so close to the mexican border, but if this seabrook thing is closer to the border it's probably a more natural target.

serious question: are there maps that show airline travel paths (side question: are these paths more-or-less the same from day to day?)? i'd be curious how many commercial flights -- say, using 737s on up -- pass within 5-10 minutes of a nuclear or otherwise hazardous facility. what still amazes me about 9/11 is how long the flights were able to be off course on their way to their targets, but i doubt any terrorist planning another airplanes-as-bombs attack is going to be willing to count on having an hour or so to get to their target...for my sake I hope they do and get intercepted and shutdown before anything goes bad, but i wouldn't be counting on it.

if there's a pretty frequent flight between some canadian destination (toronto?) and some eastern seaboard city (nyc, maybe) that usually passes within a 10 minute radius of this plant, that'd be a natural choice; similarly if any other major international flight route flew nearby some other target site (maybe the mexico city - los angeles route, for exapmle, if you're trying to get to palo verde).

like a lot of things, changing flight routes to stay away from nuke plants / hazardous chemical facilities, etc., would seem to be a pretty obvious antiterror move that doesn't cost that much. anyone know if it's been done (or has been done already)?



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 06:38 PM
link   
That NY Sun has been a busy little paper! They have all kinds of funny stuff!
I'd be more willing to believe this title,"TA-THREATS: Former Iranian Shah Official Warns of U.S. Terrorist Attack."

[edit on 16-12-2004 by curme]



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 07:09 PM
link   
To quote:
"...to the regimen support of terrorism, including Al Qaeda."

Just out of curiousity, has Iran come out publicly and stated that they fully support terrorism and/or Al Qaeda, or is this just something that is now being "placed" in the news to justify a future attack?

Also, if a fully loaded 757 jetliner crashed into a reactor dome, would it even make a scratch? I thought those Nuclear domes were like 10 feet thick of heavily reinforced concrete. No? I would think the jet would disintegrate, and people inside wouldn't even realize they'd been hit...



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by IronDogg

Also, if a fully loaded 757 jetliner crashed into a reactor dome, would it even make a scratch? I thought those Nuclear domes were like 10 feet thick of heavily reinforced concrete. No? I would think the jet would disintegrate, and people inside wouldn't even realize they'd been hit...


Actually having toured one nuclear plant and given it s constuction details (before 9/11) the reactor walls were formed of 1.5 inch rebar meshed in such a way as to have a metal wall presented face on with three feet of poured concrete surrounding it. This was the reactor vessel or dome as some may call it. The vessel I toured was designed to take the impact of a 747.

The only fault I could see in this theory of impermiability was the fact that all the control, safety systems and generating facilities were not similarily protected.

So even though the reactor is well protected (we think) the control systems and failsafe infrastructure may not be as well protected.

In essence we are relying on automatic systems to operate perfectly to keep us safe in such an event.

That has not always worked.



posted on Dec, 16 2004 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Gosh, imagine that, the same shah that was ousted by the Revolution saying that the iranians are dangerous. Obviously nothing that the Shah's officials or the Shah himself say can be taken without serious backing.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by IronDogg
To quote:
"...to the regimen support of terrorism, including Al Qaeda."

Just out of curiousity, has Iran come out publicly and stated that they fully support terrorism and/or Al Qaeda, or is this just something that is now being "placed" in the news to justify a future attack?
.................


There are terrorist groups in Iran, and outside Iran that are backed by the Iranian government. In one of the links I gave there is information about one of those terrorist groups and their threats, they even said they await the Iranian president go ahead to execute their attacks on the 29 targets they have already picked.

---edited for errors---

[edit on 17-12-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 11:14 AM
link   
well no doubt, america is in war...

...with the world



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   
America "at" war with the world?..... is more like extremist Muslims/terrorist groups, including those governments that sponsor terrorist cells are at war with the world. Over 12 of the present wars in the world involve radical Islamic nations and terrorists. The U.S, with other countries, is involved in what...2 of them?.....



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Unfortuntely I think something major will happen again in the US, most likely nuclear or chemical this time. Its hard to determine what the truth is on the Iran situation is considering our (US) agenda in the middle east. propaganda always seems to lead to something fierce. I do know that Iran has taken an aggressive stance with the US, but I can't blame them. They have to talk tough and hope that we won't go in there. They are dancing on the edge with their underground nuclear advancement. I am not believing that they have stopped in their move forward to become a nuclear armed country. I would be trying to build nukes as well, puts your country in a position of power. People have to listen at that point, or wipe you off the face of the earth. This may unfortunately be the fate of Iran. I would hate to see all of the good people in that country die because of their poor leaders. All in the name of oil, and Iran may be sitting in the way.



posted on Dec, 17 2004 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Thanx for my daily dose of Iran goosebumps, wonder who will make a scary story tomorrow and the day after that and the day after that....

Maybe it's just all part of the pro-deception policie of Rummy and he will invade Syria instead, they didn't expect THAT ONE coming


In all seriousness, is it to early to place bets on WHEN iran will have to deal with an invasion, or you guys think the usa and or israel could deal with the irans "peacefull" nuclear program using tactical airstrikes?????

I heard the Israeli bought for $9 million worth of usa bombs recently, a good amount of bunkerbusters were part of that deal.

[edit on 17-12-2004 by Countermeasures]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join