FBI stops Iran assasination attempt on Saudi Amb. to US

[Col. Crackpot]

Breaking now per CNN. No link yet

[Dominus Atheos]

Editor's note: The FBI and the DEA have disrupted a plot involving Iran to commit terrorism inside the United States, a senior U.S. official told CNN Tuesday. The official said the alleged plan was directed by elements of the Iranian government and involved a plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

Follow below for the latest developments and read the Justice Department complaint (PDF)

[Posted at 2:41 p.m. ET] National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor released the following statement regarding the plot:

“The President was first briefed on this issue in June and directed his Administration to provide all necessary support to this investigation. The disruption of this plot is a significant achievement by our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the President is enormously grateful for their exceptional work in this instance and countless others.”

[Posted at 2:35 p.m. ET] Attorney General Eric Holder, when asked how Iran would be held "accountable" in an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, said he expected action from the White House, the State Department and Treasury within the next few hours.

A US official expanded more about how the U.S. might hold Iran accountable. The official told CNN's Elise Labott that there are likely to be more sanctions and the U.S. will be taking this up with to the United Nations Security Council and other members of the international community.

[Posted at 2:32 p.m. ET] One of the suspects, Manssor Arbabsiar, allegedly discussed bombing a restaurant in the United States that the Ambassador frequented, according to the complaint.

The U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York said Tuesday there had been a "discussion of using explosive devices" to carry out the the alleged Iranian-linked terror plot against the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

[Posted at 2:27 p.m. ET] "The criminal complaint unsealed today exposes a deadly plot directed by factions of the Iranian government to assassinate a foreign Ambassador on U.S. soil with explosives,” Attorney General Eric Holder said. “Through the diligent and coordinated efforts of our law enforcement and intelligence agencies, we were able to disrupt this plot before anyone was harmed. We will continue to investigate this matter vigorously and bring those who have violated any laws to justice.”

[Posted at 2:25 p.m. ET] The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York called the alleged Iranian-linked terror plot against the Saudi ambassador to the United States "well-funded and pernicious."

"Details of that murder plot are chilling," Preet Bharara said in a news conference Tuesday.

[Posted at 2:22 p.m. ET] The criminal complaint filed Tuesday in the Southern District of New York names Manssor Arbabsiar, a 56-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen holding both Iranian and U.S. passports, and Gholam Shakuri, an Iran-based member of Iran’s Qods Force, which is a special operations unit of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) that is said to sponsor and promote terrorist activities abroad, according to the Justice Department.

Arbabsiar was arrested on Septemnber 29, 2011, at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. He will make his initial appearance on Tuesday before in federal court in Manhattan, the Justice Department said. He allegedly confessed to his participation in the murder plot, according to the Justice Department.

Shakuri remains at large.

The men are charged with the following crimes: conspiracy to murder a foreign official; conspiracy to engage in foreign travel and use of interstate and foreign commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire; conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives); and conspiracy to commit an act of international terrorism transcending national boundaries. Arbabsiar is further charged with an additional count of foreign travel and use of interstate and foreign commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire.

[Posted at 2:19 p.m. ET] FBI Director Robert Mueller said the alleged terror plot involving Iran "reads like the pages of a Hollywood script."

"This case illustrates that we live in a world where borders and boundaries are increasingly irrelevant," Mueller said.

[Posted at 2:14 p.m. ET] An alleged plot - involving Iran - to commit terrorism inside the United States "is a fabrication," Ali Akbar Javanfekr, spokesman for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Tuesday.

Javanfekr said the Iranian government is awaiting details, but suggested U.S. authorities are attempting to distract American citizens from "domestic problems" by convincing them there is an outside threat.

[Posted at 2:12 p.m. ET] An FBI agent's affidavit obtained by CNN Tuesday accused two men of conspiring to murder Saudi Ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir.

The complaint alleges that Manssor Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri began a plot this past spring to kill Al-Jubeir.

Attorney General Eric Holder said in a news conference that the terror plot was a $1.5 million dollar "murder-for-hire" plan.

Officials also said one of the suspects told an informant that killing civilians, including senators, during the attack was "no problem" and "no big deal."

[Posted at 2:00 p.m. ET] The FBI and the DEA have disrupted a plot involving Iran to commit terrorism inside the United States, a senior U.S. official told CNN.

I'm surprised. The suspect is being arraigned in federal court, and the Obama administration is only threatening sanctions. Good on them.

[Col. Crackpot]

Http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44861178/ns ... s-security

MSNBC now confirms
Sorry haven't figured out how to dress my links on android yet

[Night_stalker]

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/11/of ... ving-iran/

Link now up.

[TheHammer]

If the details are accurate - that this was a plot to blow up a restaurant on American soil, and if they actually have hard evidence the government of Iran is behind this, I would suggest something a bit stronger than "sanctions". Maybe sinking half their navy and destroying what airforce they have will teach them the appropriate lesson...

And on a side note, why the hell would the DEA be involved in an anti-terror action?

[Night_stalker]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

[Flagg]

If the details are accurate - that this was a plot to blow up a restaurant on American soil, and if they actually have hard evidence the government of Iran is behind this, I would suggest something a bit stronger than "sanctions". Maybe sinking half their navy and destroying what airforce they have will teach them the appropriate lesson...

And on a side note, why the hell would the DEA be involved in an anti-terror action?

And let the war mongering begin...

[TheHammer]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

What would you call a plot to blow up a restaurant? That falls under "act of war" in my book.

[Block]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

What Iran did, if it was a sanctioned operation, is an act of war as well, and not the first that Iran has comitted in the last 5 years. I'm not advocating war, we have enough problems as it is, but how often do we let them poke us til we respond with something stronger than sanctions?

[Col. Crackpot]

Well FlFlaggtrying to kill an ambassador is an act of war. So it's already begun. It will be very interesting to see how the Saudis react to this. They do have the ability to hit Iran. I wonder if they have the will. Or maybe they just expect the US to do it for them...

[Flagg]

Well FlFlaggtrying to kill an ambassador is an act of war. So it's already begun. It will be very interesting to see how the Saudis react to this. They do have the ability to hit Iran. I wonder if they have the will. Or maybe they just expect the US to do it for them...

Then let the Saudis fight it. They won't of course, they don't have the ability to do shit as they are too busy oppressing their own people, so you're right, they would expect us to do it. Well fuck that.

[Flagg]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

What would you call a plot to blow up a restaurant? That falls under "act of war" in my book.

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

[Crateria]

Well FlFlaggtrying to kill an ambassador is an act of war. So it's already begun. It will be very interesting to see how the Saudis react to this. They do have the ability to hit Iran. I wonder if they have the will. Or maybe they just expect the US to do it for them...

Then let the Saudis fight it. They won't of course, they don't have the ability to do shit as they are too busy oppressing their own people, so you're right, they would expect us to do it. Well fuck that.

Agreed, the Saudi military is a worthless piece of shit that breaks down easily and has very little motivation to fight except against THE EVIL WEST, suddenly which it becomes a raging pack of Al-Qaliban, no?

[Col. Crackpot]

Well FlFlaggtrying to kill an ambassador is an act of war. So it's already begun. It will be very interesting to see how the Saudis react to this. They do have the ability to hit Iran. I wonder if they have the will. Or maybe they just expect the US to do it for them...

Then let the Saudis fight it. They won't of course, they don't have the ability to do shit as they are too busy oppressing their own people, so you're right, they would expect us to do it. Well fuck that.

Or this event could serve as a catalyst to rally the people around the government to strike down the foreign evildoers and give the military something to do. God knows we've seen enough of that...

[Block]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

What would you call a plot to blow up a restaurant? That falls under "act of war" in my book.

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

The difference is that we're not planning on carrying it out, or actively attempting to do so. They were engaged in a conspiracy that was actively attempting and planning to kill the Ambassador.

[Col. Crackpot]

Yeah, and AFTER we spark off a war by doing what is usually considered a act of war, what then?

What would you call a plot to blow up a restaurant? That falls under "act of war" in my book.

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

By that logic everyone who studies martial arts should be charged with assault. Bit of a leap in logic don't you think?

[Flagg]

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

By that logic everyone who studies martial arts should be charged with assault. Bit of a leap in logic don't you think?

Meh, conceded.

However, I don't believe plotting to kill another countries ambassador, even on our own soil, rises to the level of "lulz we needs to sink half their naviez and blowz up they're airforze!!!"

[TheHammer]

Well FlFlaggtrying to kill an ambassador is an act of war. So it's already begun. It will be very interesting to see how the Saudis react to this. They do have the ability to hit Iran. I wonder if they have the will. Or maybe they just expect the US to do it for them...

Then let the Saudis fight it. They won't of course, they don't have the ability to do shit as they are too busy oppressing their own people, so you're right, they would expect us to do it. Well fuck that.

They weren't preparing to blow up a Saudi restaurant. They were preparing to blow up an an American one with, presumedly, the Saudi Ambassador in it. That would no doubt also have claimed American lives. Now, I'm not for going on a knee jerk reaction. Before we do anything, we'd better be sure of our facts.

HOWEVER if the plot is as advertised, backed by the Iranian government, then sactions aren't cutting it. Just because the attack was foiled doesn't excuse the fact that this was an act of war. An appropriate response should be a righteous ass kicking. No invasion, no occupation, but a big enough military action to let them know that this shit will not be tolerated and there will be dire consequences for any governments who attempt it in the future.

[Col. Crackpot]

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

By that logic everyone who studies martial arts should be charged with assault. Bit of a leap in logic don't you think?

Meh, conceded.

However, I don't believe plotting to kill another countries ambassador, even on our own soil, rises to the level of "lulz we needs to sink half their naviez and blowz up they're airforze!!!"

Agreed, but sanctions are useless and these fundie fucks will continue with their bullshit antics unless they feel the effect of serious consequences. The question is what consequences.

[Block]

We have plots to invade and occupy countries, are those acts of war too, or does it get a pass because it's just "military preparedness"?

By that logic everyone who studies martial arts should be charged with assault. Bit of a leap in logic don't you think?

Meh, conceded.

However, I don't believe plotting to kill another countries ambassador, even on our own soil, rises to the level of "lulz we needs to sink half their naviez and blowz up they're airforze!!!"

Oh I agree with that, Hammer is being over the top. However, sanctions just don't seem enough considering that Iran has been fighting a low intensity war with us inside Iraq for years, or at the very least enabling others to do so for them.

[Flagg]

Agreed, but sanctions are useless and these fundie fucks will continue with their bullshit antics unless they feel the effect of serious consequences. The question is what consequences.

I'd go with the Clinton approach. Blow up the headquarters of their version of the CIA and /or whatever branch of the military they used to plan this little dumbshit maneuver like Bubba did after the Iraqis tried to kill HW Bush and hope to shit they don't decide "fuck it" and cross the Iraqi border.

[K. A. Pital]

So did the USA invade Chile when Pinochet's ilk blew up Orlando Letelier?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Le ... assination

No, it didn't. The USA has no right to brag about "invading people for blowing up people".

[Block]

So did the USA invade Chile when Pinochet's ilk blew up Orlando Letelier?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Le ... assination

No, it didn't. The USA has no right to brag about "invading people for blowing up people".

Who's talking about invading?

[Col. Crackpot]

So did the USA invade Chile when Pinochet's ilk blew up Orlando Letelier?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Le ... assination

No, it didn't. The USA has no right to brag about "invading people for blowing up people".

Thats a poor analogy. Letelier was killed by agents of his own government.

[Flagg]

So did the USA invade Chile when Pinochet's ilk blew up Orlando Letelier?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_Le ... assination

No, it didn't. The USA has no right to brag about "invading people for blowing up people".

Thats a poor analogy. Letelier was killed by agents of his own government.

Not really, since it was an operation planned and actually executed by the Chilean government which killed an American on American soil and we did fuckall except prosecute the offenders.