'Mossad gave Arbabsiar ID papers', page 1

'Mossad gave Arbabsiar ID papers'

www.presstv.ir

"The person who is accused in this case had received fake ID documents from Mossad three months ago," the Pakistani Urdu-language Ummat daily quoted the Inter-Services Intelligence officer as saying on condition of anonymity.

He also revealed that Mansour Arbabsiar, 56, "was due to conduct an operation named Foss Fling" for the Mossad.

On Sunday, Iran's Foreign Ministry once again summoned the Swiss envoy to protest US allegations of Tehran's involvement in a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

During the meeting, head of the North America Bureau of the Irani

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.haaretz.com
english.farsnews.com

All I can say is wow! This is an interesting development. If there is any truth to this news then it will be very embarrassing for the U.S. and Israel.

I found a few questionable sources on this subject and found these sources afterwards. I don't blame the mainstream for not touching this one without ridiculing the possibility of it being true.

I don't want to present this news as factual just yet. The details are just coming out. I just thought you all might want to hear about it. I personally wouldn't be surprised if it was true since a large portion of us figured this was a false flag from the beginning anyways and this fits Mossad's MO.

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

---

In all honesty, this has been the most believable breakthrough in the story since this whole plot was made public.

I can't wait to see how it plays out.

This isn't looking good for the White House's claims that they have proof of this leading back to Iran.

reply to post by Maxmars

---

I am prepared for that as well. I am currently looking for more information to help back up my sources. I have a few leads nothing substantial yet. We all know the ultra mainstream networks will not cover this. The Haaretz source I provided mentions this theory but ridicules it. We cannot expect the mainstream news to actually report on this story without bias.

Our best bet sources of information on this story will probably come out of European or Middle Eastern sources. I am sure extremists from both sides will have their own version of this story too.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

---

Does anyone know if this info has popped up in any Pakistan media outlets? PressTV is the state tv for the Iranian Government, and the story is quoting anonymous people.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Corruption Exposed

---

Does anyone know if this info has popped up in any Pakistan media outlets? PressTV is the state tv for the Iranian Government, and the story is quoting anonymous people.

From the source:

"The person who is accused in this case had received fake ID documents from Mossad three months ago," the Pakistani Urdu-language Ummat daily quoted the Inter-Services Intelligence officer as saying on condition of anonymity.

I have found their website but the translator only changes the hyper-links and the Urdu text remains the same so I can't read it. I'm working on a translation though.

ummat.com.pk...

Any advice?

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Xcathdra

---

Here is an update from Haaretz you might be interested in dissecting:

Who leaked the details of a CIA-Mossad plot against Iran?

This is getting some major mainstream attention. This may be pretty big.

edit on 17-10-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)

Isn't that article from 2008, and about a totally different plot?

reply to post by Dagar

---

Thank you, you are correct. I am kind of embarrassed now. I am going to edit that post

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Dagar

---

Thank you, you are correct. I am kind of embarrassed now. I am going to edit that post

No worries... It's just that I started reading it, and had to come back and re-read the thread... in case I'd missed something.

Good thread

Originally posted by Maxmars
I am expecting nothing less than an absolute flat denial, and an uncategorical rejection of the source....

Well, it is a state-run propaganda outlet. It's owned and controlled by the Iranian government. If you are skeptical of the American media, you should also be skeptical of the Iranian government's media. And there's a lot to be skeptical about here:

"The person who is accused in this case had received fake ID documents from Mossad three months ago," the Pakistani Urdu-language Ummat daily quoted the Inter-Services Intelligence officer as saying on condition of anonymity.

An Iranian state-run propaganda outlet quoting a Pakistani newspaper quoting an anonymous (and possibly fictitious) ISI officer. Exactly which link in this chain is predisposed towards being truthful regarding Israel or the West? The story came from "intelligence officers" and propagandists; isn't lying their job? Would it not be to Pakistan and Iran's benefit to direct blame onto Israel, even if only their own peoples believed it?

He also revealed that Mansour Arbabsiar, 56, "was due to conduct an operation named Foss Fling" for the Mossad.

So the ISI not only knows about this alleged Arbabsiar-Mossad link, they also know the internal name for the operation ... which means the ISI officer just burned whichever asset in Mossad told them about this. You all know about compartmentalization, right? That means only a few people in the Mossad would even know the words "Foss Fling." The words would only be transmitted over the most highly encrypted channels. And now the ISI has just told Mossad that there is a mole in the Foss Fling compartment, or that the encryption used in Foss Fling has been broken. An ISI officer just destroyed one of their most valuable intelligence sources so he could be quoted (anonymously) in a newspaper. Either that, or someone just made it all up.

On Sunday, Iran's Foreign Ministry once again summoned the Swiss envoy to protest US allegations of Tehran's involvement in a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

During the meeting, head of the North America Bureau of the Iranian Foreign Ministry said the US was obliged to collect information about the suspect in custody, and extradite him to Iran's interest section in Washington based on international regulation.

Which regulation is that? Aliens charged with crimes in a host nation are arrested, tried, and serve their sentence in the host nation. (NatGeo's "Locked Up Abroad" is a fascinating reminder of this fact.) They can get assistance from their government, but they aren't extradited as a matter of routine.

Conclusion: Amateurish propaganda.

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

---

Not being argumentative, but just for the sake of the exercise...

So, we know all reporting agencies are suspect; which generally means they all have the same weight as factual sources... we should reject this one especially because....?

Also, assuming this is propaganda, which it very well could be, in what manner can that assertion be proved, rather than by supposition based on presumption?

I know the vogue nature of the Iran hate parade. That march has gone on for decades and decades... in the end, it has gone on so long, that the machinations of each side should have zero credibility by now. But neither does.

It remains to be seen if this well-within-character allegation is as manufactured as the allegations of a plot involving a pot-smoking taxi-cab driver reaching out to the most lethal criminal organization on the continent (not including the more obvious ones) to abandon their lucrative trade and power in the narcotics world and migrate into international terrorism... an ideological activity with fundamentalist roots.


I wouldn't be tremendously surprised either way.

Point is.... theater is theater. We already know who we are listening to, so I suspect we should call a show a show and allow the story to develop - lest aside from playing as fools, we are to add the trappings of a clown for good measure.

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

---

Not being argumentative, but just for the sake of the exercise...

So, we know all reporting agencies are suspect; which generally means they all have the same weight as factual sources... we should reject this one especially because....?

All may be suspect, but that doesn't mean all carry the same weight. Most of the developed world has a thriving fourth estate, comprising many different outlets with different levels of trustworthiness and expertise. Iran isn't like that; it (officially) has no private media. PressTV is funded entirely by the government. It's an extension of the state, charged with making the state look good to the English-speaking world. It should be treated very critically whenever it reports on anything that touches the state.

Then there is also the fact that we are comparing media products with primary sources. This is an apples-to-oranges comparison. The PressTV allegations constitute, in their purest sense, a product of the media. There is apparently nothing behind them but what some reporters somewhere said. We are asked to take them at their word and we do not know their names, nor do we have any special reason to trust them. We don't have access to the source of the quote, or any documentary evidence that he was telling the truth. The US government allegations, although frequently reported in the media, are not in themselves a product of the media. They are the product of the US government. We know the name of the FBI special agent who swore out the complaint against Arbabsiar and Shakuri, and we know he was under oath and will suffer grave penalties if Arbabsiar's lawyer catches him in a lie. That fact alone makes him more credible than PressTV's anonymous source. Until Press TV finds an ISI officer willing to speak officially and on the record, putting his reputation and livelihood on the line like our guy did, their anonymous source will remain less credible.

Also, assuming this is propaganda, which it very well could be, in what manner can that assertion be proved, rather than by supposition based on presumption?

Do you mean, "How can it be proven that it is propaganda?" I usually leave proof to mathematicians and distillers, but in this case I might try proof by definition (which PressTV clearly fits).

reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli

---

Did you not read the article?

Press TV are not the original source.

They are one of the various sources to report this, Press TV being one of them. Read the thread again if you want to know where the original source came from. I'm not claiming the original source to be any better than Press TV but I just wanted to get this story out so it can get looked at by ATS members. I have seen many breaking stories from Press TV turn out to be true. I remember when Mossad was blamed for the Dubai assassinations. No one believed it then but it turned out to be pretty convincing.

Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags

Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags

Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags

Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags

Russia announces enormous finds of radioactive waste and nuclear reactors in Arctic seas
  Posted 12 days ago with 49 member flags

TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags

Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags

Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: