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.

 

Iran – The Ultimate State Sponsor of Terror: Osama’s New Home

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:38 AM
link   
It makes sense to me that Bin Laden would be in Iran. The Presidents approval rating is in the toilet right now. So Bin Laden's in Iran, we go to war with Iran getting the war they wanted, the President's approval rating goes way up because we're now focusing on the "guy that was behind 9/11" (which is really, our President) enough to impliment the draft and conviently the amendment gets passed abolishing Presidental Term Limits and Bush continues to be our President until he feels like retiring.

I hate white people sometimes (and yes I am a white person)

[edit on 15-6-2005 by NoJustice]




posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoJustice

I hate white people sometimes (and yes I am a white person)

[edit on 15-6-2005 by NoJustice]


What does that comment have to do with anything that has been discussed in this thread? Please keep race out of this thread, this threads topic is regarding wether Osama is in Iran right now, not who likes what color people the most.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by NoJustice

I hate white people sometimes (and yes I am a white person)

[edit on 15-6-2005 by NoJustice]


What does that comment have to do with anything that has been discussed in this thread? Please keep race out of this thread, this threads topic is regarding wether Osama is in Iran right now, not who likes what color people the most.


Fine it was just a joke though. Geez so sensitive. But I stand by the rest of my post!

[edit on 15-6-2005 by NoJustice]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
OBL in Iran......

Perhaps, perhaps not (I am leaning to the latter) but regardless of if he is in Iran or not, Iran is still a country that the US needs to deal with. Iran gaining nuclear weapons is simply unnacceptable, so there are 2 options that were presented in the opening post:

1) An Iranian revolution. I think it's the Wests best bet. The youth in Iran want to be modern and western. All the US and Europe needs to do is back a revolution, and let the Iranians take their own country. Get some moderates in there, and there is no problem.

2) Full scale war. Last option, and not a good one from a military standpoint. The US is spread thin as it is, and occupying Iraq while also invading Iran would stretch the US military to it's limits. However, the upside is that the US gains control of all the Iranian oil - not exactly an insignificant thing when one looks at the showdown with China that is on the horizon. Add to that Iraq, and you are looking at some serious energy reserves. Of course, after Iran and Iraq, all that is left is the crown jewl (Saudi oil).


Personally, I could care less about OBL being in Iran or not. OBL doesn't make it any more of an issue IMO, because frankly, I am much more worried about them going nuclear then I am about OBL.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Assuming Bin-Laden is alive. He is in fact SOMEWHERE.

I also think that the SOMEWHERE is not currently under US/Allied/Western control.

Considering the size hole in which Saddam Hussein was found (within an occupied Iraq), the chances of finding a Bin-Laden in the rest of the vast sandbox that is the Middle East are slim.

That being said, I don't think the apprehension of a Bin Laden will have significant impact on the overall Islamic intent to extend it's control to new areas and peoples. It will not end the conflict in Afghanistan, and certainly not douse the flames in Iraq. It will not quell the Palestinian troubles, nor the Muslim Czechnian terrorists. It will not silence the Muslim separatists in the Phillipines, nor their Ricin-carrying brethren in the UK. It will not forestall the Iranian development of nuclear power and the equivalent weaponry, which will most assuredly find it's way westward.

Radical Islam is the heir to the throne of fascism, nazism and communism.
The millions who perished last century under the heels of those ideologies and in the efforts to regain freedoms will have good company in the millions who will die in a world-wide Islamic war.

Bin-Laden is nothing.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Here is some more from CNN.com:

www.cnn.com...

"(CNN) -- The U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan said Thursday that he does not believe Osama bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar are in the central Asian country...."



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
OBL in Iran......

Perhaps, perhaps not (I am leaning to the latter) but regardless of if he is in Iran or not, Iran is still a country that the US needs to deal with. Iran gaining nuclear weapons is simply unnacceptable, so there are 2 options that were presented in the opening post:

1) An Iranian revolution. I think it's the Wests best bet. The youth in Iran want to be modern and western. All the US and Europe needs to do is back a revolution, and let the Iranians take their own country. Get some moderates in there, and there is no problem.

2) Full scale war. Last option, and not a good one from a military standpoint. The US is spread thin as it is, and occupying Iraq while also invading Iran would stretch the US military to it's limits. However, the upside is that the US gains control of all the Iranian oil - not exactly an insignificant thing when one looks at the showdown with China that is on the horizon. Add to that Iraq, and you are looking at some serious energy reserves. Of course, after Iran and Iraq, all that is left is the crown jewl (Saudi oil).


Personally, I could care less about OBL being in Iran or not. OBL doesn't make it any more of an issue IMO, because frankly, I am much more worried about them going nuclear then I am about OBL.


More unacceptable than Israel? Japan? Pakistan? Brazil? Why is Iran prevented? You've allowed their nearest enemy to have nukes but deny them the chance to meet force with force. At least two of these have nuke capability and global launch capability - the important bit!

Why should the US get involved? Who gave you the right to tell other countries what to do? Do you get taught in school everyone else is incapable of running their own affairs and needs uncle sam and his corporate minions to save them from themselves? We used to think on similar lines and look what happened to our empire!

'US gains control of the oil ' I think you mean 'US steals'

Personally I find the idea of dubya with his finger on the trigger much more worrying than Iran having enough nukes to put Nazi Israel back in its box.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase


Or maybe they don't know where the hell he is.
Maybe they're saying he's in Iran to make the very gullible sheeple support actions against Iran.
I think you hit the nail on the head here. This government has succeeded in brainwashing lots out there and this is more of their wacky psychology.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 07:26 AM
link   
More on this:

Interview

Kenneth Timmerman, the author of the new book Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran.

FP: Ok, so let’s get to it: Osama in Iran?

“Timmerman: One of the recurring themes of Countdown to Crisis is the wilful blindness and incompetence of our intelligence community, especially the CIA. For years, Agency analysts, led by the likes of Paul Pilar – who headed the Counterterrorism Center under Clinton – have sworn up and down that there can be no cooperation between Iran and al Qaeda because the Iranians are Shia Muslims and al Qaeda are Wahhabis, and Wahhabis eat Shias for breakfast.

Khobar Towers? All those travels of the September 11 hijackers to and fro Iran? Meaningless, according to the CIA. Iran was just serving as a travel agent – 5% commission on all bookings.

My sources, former Iranian intelligence officials who have defected recently, simply laugh when I tell them what the CIA believes and has told the 9/11 Commission. It is ludicrous to believe that al Qaeda operatives were simply transiting from Tehran to Afghanistan before 9/11 without extensive contacts and control by Iranian intelligence. And yet, because of the “concept” driving the CIA mindset, that is what they believe. According to our $40 billion a year intelligence community, there can be no Sunni-Shia cooperation in murdering Americans.

My sources have brought me hard evidence, which I detail in the book, not only of the active participation of Iranian intelligence in the September 11 attacks on America, but of the ongoing cooperation between Iran and al Qaeda, including meetings last November and this March between Osama bin Laden and top regime officials in Iran.


Simply put, al Qaeda would not exist today as an organized force without the active material support from Iran….”



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Some of you people are so funny...

I think he lives under the white house or in some nice mansion in Bel Air or something. Osama is on the run because America doesn't want to catch him. I live in Iran, and be sure we have no Al Qaeda idiots, even if we do-we don't have much to do with them. They just happened to mar kthemselves innocent Afghans and come in here with a visa.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
As I stated earlier, the person who gave the intelligence information is not credible.
Even the CIA says so.

Iran: CIA says Curt Weldon's inside guy is not credible



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
No, instead you have Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, or MEK's. Currently active in Iraq, killing American soldiers and Iraqi civilians. In fact I just watched one of your young boys shoot a soldier, thank God he wore his ballistic vest. The boy was caught. A little background:

1979 Islamic revolution that replaced the shah with a Shiite Islamist regime led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. But MEK’s ideology, a blend of Marxism and Islamism, put it at odds with the postrevolutionary government, and its original leadership was soon executed by the Khomeini regime. In 1981, the group was driven from its bases on the Iran-Iraq border and resettled in Paris, where it began supporting Iraq in its eight-year war against Khomeini’s Iran. In 1986, MEK moved its headquarters to Iraq, which used MEK to harass neighboring Iran. During the 2003 Iraq war, U.S. forces cracked down on MEK’s bases in Iraq, and in June 2003 French authorities raided an MEK compound outside Paris and arrested 160 people, including Maryam Rajavi. MEK is believed to have more than 10,000 members and actively fighting in Iraq. When Saddam Hussein was in power, MEK received the majority of its financial support from the Iraqi regime.

In 2001, the Justice Department accused seven Iranians in the United States of funneling donations—between $5,000 and $10,000 per day—collected at Los Angeles International Airport to MEK. The money allegedly was for starving children in Iran; according to the FBI, it was used to buy arms.

Your political muscle is the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Currently, the NCR has more than 500 members, half of whom are women. Religious and ethnic minorities, such as the Kurds and Baluchis, are also represented. Six opposition organizations or parties have joined the body, along with 229 distinguished public figures, technocrats, specialists, artists, intellectuals and scholars residing in Europe and America. A number of army officers are also members.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   
The Ultimate sponsors of terrorism award could go to the makers of Hollywood War and Horror movies.

Remember a movie called 'Towering Inferno' ?

really smart move, making that one



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   
I've never heard of those MEKs (they have an Arabic name like Al Qaeda-so it mostly has to do with the Arabs not us). We have basijis, but not MEKs. Basijis are like Islamic groups who fought in the war with Iraq. As for some history about the Iranian revoltuion, here it goes:

People started rejecting the shah, and America came in and told him "leave, we'll fix your country". So the poor guy left, and what do they do-they bring in Khomeni. People in Iran were hoping for free food, houses and oil-they thought their Imam Ali was here. They even sadly thought the moon had his face on it. When he came things changed. America thought Khomeni would give them an upper hand, instead he gave them a big slap in the face. They took over the U.S. Embassy, et cetra... So since then they've been enemies.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join