Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case?

By MICHAEL KAUFMAN | October 10, 2012

“…it reads like the pages of a Hollywood script.”

– FBI director Robert S. Mueller III

You’ve probably forgotten the plot: Mansour Arbabsiar, an  Iranian-American used car salesman living in Texas, is arrested and charged with acting on behalf of high ranking officials in Iran’s government to conspire with a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S.

This case begins dramatically, with Attorney General Holder announcing the arrest, stating that the plot was “directed and approved by elements of the Iranian government and, specifically, senior members of the Quds Force.” This is followed by President Obama asserting that “we know that he had direct links, was paid by, and directed by individuals in the Iranian government.”  Thus, the utmost importance is conferred upon the arrest of Arbabsiar.

So, we have international intrigue spanning three countries, well-known villains mixed together in fresh combination and charismatic, award-winning stars hitting their marks in supporting roles—all indications point to a critically acclaimed blockbuster. Then Arbabsiar shuffles in front of the camera. Noooo! He’s all wrong for the part! Although his antics in a second tier reality show had once made him briefly popular, he can’t convey the cunning and menace necessary for the role of terrorist mastermind. This jarring bit of miscasting immediately brings greater scrutiny to the whole production and a realization that the entire plot doesn’t make any sense at all.

It becomes hard for the audience to concentrate on the intended theme– The Iranians are plotting against us– when fundamental questions of common sense are crowding the mind: Why would the Iranians be so careless as to use Arbabsiar, a man who seems singularly unqualified to carry out such a mission?  Why would they initiate such a dangerous escalation? What tangible benefits would be gained from killing the Ambassador?

Publicity didn’t go as planned, as reporting of events immediately began to diverge from the usual pattern. Most significant were the strong assertions of doubt about the plot from those cited in the media as experts. At the polite end of the spectrum, Iran expert Volker Perthes says, “I don’t regard it as impossible but rather improbable.”  Coverage was especially notable for how prominently the skeptics were featured and in how lacking most articles were in finding competing expert opinions to try to achieve the usual veneer of balance. (2 thumbs down!)  The response of the general public, as judged by the comments sections of the news articles, was overwhelmingly incredulous and dismissive of the charges.  Unsure of how to respond to the push-back, supporters of the administration’s claims appeared half-hearted at best, to the point that Hillary Clinton could only lamely offer that” nobody could make that up, right?”, implying that the story’s very improbability lent it credibility. To sum up, after a disastrous opening day, blasted by the critics, this film went straight to video.

But, of course, this is not a film but what should have been one of the most important stories of the year. Given the widespread disbelief of the government’s charges, it would have been reasonable to expect journalists to pursue the story with increased aggressiveness. That this story was allowed to fade out after such an auspicious beginning seems curious. A comparison with The New York Times’ coverage of the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called underwear bomber, is instructive. In the aftermath of this attempted act of terror we saw numerous articles, which continued to develop throughout the days and weeks. These articles, with datelines from New York, London, Nigeria, Yemen and Lebanon, tried to piece together Abdulmutullab’s actions and movements across several continents, attempting to dig deeper into the details of the plot. Multiple authors tried to fill out the story and understand the process by which this young man reached his extremist position. On December 30, only 5 days after the incident, reporters are already printing information from the NSA discussing their previous four months tracking the plot; this in a case where there was huge intelligence failure!

In contrast, it seems as if after the first day very little coverage has been given to the Arbabsiar case, where claims of involvement at the highest levels of the Iranian government, if true, make it a much more serious matter than previous failed plots. We learned superficial details about Arbabsiar’s failed businesses, absent mindedness and difficulty in retaining his keys and cell phone, but very little of substance has come to light since that would help us make sense of the story. I haven’t seen any follow-up on a more serious discussion of who Mansour Arbabsiar is. Initially, a friend is quoted as saying Arbabsiar is a businessman and so he did it for money, not out of religious fanaticism. That’s all. Mystery, apparently, solved. Arbabsiar may not be a religious zealot, but surely it’s a complicated and fascinating question how a person with no history of violence progresses from pursuing his fortune through multiple small business ventures to being willing to blow up a crowded restaurant and saying if one hundred people are killed with the ambassador, “Fuck ‘em. No big deal.” as alleged in the criminal complaint filed against him. […]

Now at last, an article appears in the New York Times that whets the appetite for the coming trial, scheduled to begin October 22. It gives a fascinating description of Arbabsiar’s 32 hours of interviews with the government’s psychiatrist, depicting him as a person by turns naïve, likable, grandiose, charming, with a darker side with the potential to erupt. We see a man having only the thinnest thread of connection to the world we actually inhabit, seemingly unaware of the adversarial nature of his predicament, making it even harder to take a plot with such a character seriously. Suddenly Arbabsiar’s cinematic analogue occurs to me: Timothy Treadwell, the protagonist of Warner Herzog’s documentary Grizzly Man. Treadwell, like Arbabsiar, is a former “party boy” suffering from bi-polar disorder, but whose wildly fluctuating monologues and rants we actually got to see on camera. Imagine David Petraeus directing Treadwell to arrange with the Taliban to assassinate Venezuela’s ambassador to Iran. Now we’re getting somewhere.

One key component of the government-created conspiracy has been the selection of deluded, marginal figures to entrap. It seems no stretch to believe that Arbabsiar fits snuggly into this demographic and it is quite easy to imagine him, with delusions of grandeur and eager to please, participating enthusiastically in such a fictitious plot. When the word terrorism is invoked, we are not supposed to care about the lives of a few unfortunate, hapless characters, who are quite easily disposed of with little protection or interference from the courts and minimal interest from the press and public. There’s no reason to believe Arbabsiar will be an exception.

What is extremely difficult to imagine, however, is any responsible party, especially one portrayed to be as ruthless and disciplined as Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, involving him in its schemes. On the surface, there might appear to be more pressure on the administration to prove its case regarding involvement of the Iranian government. After all, President Obama himself has put his credibility on the line by stating categorically that “We would not be bringing forward a case unless we knew exactly how to support all the allegations that are contained in the indictment.” Although, as we saw with the dirty bomb allegations in the Jose Padilla case some pretty extraordinary claims can disappear quite easily without any challenge or uproar.

This time could be different. The government could proceed in an open trial and prove its case conclusively regarding both Arbabsiar and his Iranian co-conspirators. The press could take a skeptical, confrontational stance toward any charges which don’t withstand scrutiny, challenging those who propagated them and demanding accountability for such reckless behavior in the highly sensitive area of U. S.-Iran relations. While either of these could happen this time, you don’t need to be an expert to feel comfortable saying, “It’s possible, but not probable.”

Michael Kaufman can be reached at: mlkaufman0@yahoo.com.

October 10, 2012 - Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , , , ,

7 Comments

  1. […] https://alethonews.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/whatever-happened-to-that-iranian-bomb-plot-case/ Share this:FacebookTwitterTumblrEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]

    Pingback by Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? | Aletho News | the Mahoney | October 11, 2012

  2. […] Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? […]

    Pingback by Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? | Document The Truth | April 24, 2013

  3. […] […]

    Pingback by Anonymous | April 24, 2013

  4. flag flags are like one trick pony’s very boring after awhile, the fools have gone to this well far too many times… Canadians are intelligent enough to know Iran has nothing to gain by such non sense, only the usual suspects like Mossad and their idiot assets stand to gain from such garbage. The security firms lining up supported by local Masons and other NWO useful idiots may also stand to scavenge a few crumbs for their deceitful support, by some of us know what is really going on, and we are watching you all very closely! take notice!

    Comment by vibhuti | April 24, 2013

  5. […] Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? […]

    Pingback by Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? « Truth Is Rising | October 17, 2014

  6. Sadly, most ‘reporting’ is nothing but a mouthpiece for the government’s agenda, these days, so expect mostly stupidity to go along with this. A ‘no questions asked’ journalistic policy, like 9/11, Boston, Sandy Hook, Benghazi, Atrocious, over-the-top, Police State acts of violence, etc.

    Case in point?

    Look at Brietbart’s site. After he was murdered? Boy, did THEY ever ‘get the memo’! That site is now like The National Inquirer for idiotic government propaganda! Once the government removed Andrew, they removed THAT thorn in their side.

    Luckily, though, for the government, gullible Americans actually believe whatever nonsense they’re told, so pretty much any lie is met with belief – or panic, like Ebola, ISIS, etc…… Whatever the required response necessary, for said propaganda, is easy to generate when you have a nation that simply CANNOT think for itself.

    “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people” ~ H.L.Mencken, American journalist.

    Too bad no one ever mentions the 2 Israelis, one a Mossad agent, busted inside the Mexican National Congress, posing as journalist/film crew, and caught with weapons and grenades….

    Or am I being ‘anti-Semitic’?

    Comment by Occams | October 17, 2014

  7. […] Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? « Aletho News. […]

    Pingback by Whatever Happened to that Iranian Bomb Plot Case? « Aletho News « The Progressive Mind | October 17, 2014


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.