Huge Iranian energy plant explosion coincides with bid on Ahmadinejad's life!

[Christians4LessGvt]

Huge Iranian energy plant explosion
coincides with bid on Ahmadinejad's life

DEBKAfile Special Report

August 4, 2010, 9:16 PM (GMT+02:00) 


Mysterious explosions at new Iranian petrochemicals plant

A massive explosion killed at least five workers at the giant Pardis petrochemicals complex in southern Iran Wednesday, August 4, at around 12:30 - just about the time an explosive device was hurled at Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as his heavily secured armored convoy drove through the northern Iranian city of Hamadan. This is reported by debkafile's Iranian sources.

Ahmadinejad was unhurt although some of his bodyguards and bystanders were certainly injured. He made straight for Hamadan's central stadium and began delivering a speech that was broadcast live by state television.

Assaluyeh, the site of the Pardis complex, is situated at the opposite end of Iran, on its southern Persian Gulf coast not far from the Bushehr nuclear reactor. Iranian officials admit that large sections of the complex were destroyed but attributed the blast to a ruptured gas pipe. debkafile's intelligence sources report that the plant was hit by five explosive devices. It was new, personally inaugurated on July 28 by President Ahmadinejad, who described it as a miracle of Iranian hi-tech.

Iranian spokesman were also trying to play down the attempt on the president's life by a bomber present in the large audience surrounding his convoy. At first they reported that the target was the journalists' minivan riding in his convoy. But their security services made haste to put the Hamadan and Pardis attacks together for a joint investigation. They suspect some enemy antagonist may have sought to prove it can simultaneously strike at two major targets in opposite ends of the country and get close to the president and also the Bushehr reactor.

Assaluyeh the town is a particularly sensitive place, because it is the hub of the Pars Special Energy Economic Zone whose industries are fueled by the natural gas piped in from the giant South Pars field.

Three days before the petrochemical complex was inaugurated, there was another mysterious explosion at a second energy plant, this one located on Kharg Island.

Iran's security chiefs are beginning to suspect that one or more groups of covert saboteurs are at large on Iran's coast opposite the Strait of Hormuz and are gunning for the strategic industries and facilities located there.

Hamadan's population is incidentally purely Iranian Shiite with none of the ethnic or religious minorities persecuted by the regime. It was built at Biblical Shushan, the burial sites of Queen Esther and Mordecai, several hundreds kilometers west of Tehran.

[Michael Tee]

Pretty lame and pathetic attempts.  So the Iranians, duly warned, now need to beef up their plant security and exercise some extra vigilance.   The plain and simple facts are that the Iranians will have nuclear weapons and should have nuclear weapons.  A few plant explosions, even the assassination of the idiotic Ahmadinejac, will not deter this great country from its legitimate aspirations towards independence and self-defence against American imperialism, greed and aggression.

[Plane]

Pretty lame and pathetic attempts.  So the Iranians, duly warned, now need to beef up their plant security and exercise some extra vigilance.   The plain and simple facts are that the Iranians will have nuclear weapons and should have nuclear weapons.  A few plant explosions, even the assassination of the idiotic Ahmadinejac, will not deter this great country from its legitimate aspirations towards independence and self-defence against American imperialism, greed and aggression.

They never will have the power to stand against an America motivated to destroy them, but it is better for us to be reluctant than eager.

Unfortunately they have the power to stand against their own people for quite a while. These attackers are not successfull and I wouldn't expect them to be for years , but as the years go by the reasons to fight the government might pile up and include more of the people.

[Michael Tee]

<<They never will have the power to stand against an America motivated to destroy them . . . >>

Short-term, no, but then in the short term, the American people are not "motivated to destroy them."  My guess is that the American people don't give a shit about destroying them, but that a small coterie of neo-cons, slavishly devoted to the destruction of Israel's enemies, are working feverishly as they did with Iraq to whip up anti-Iranian war fever among the American people.

The American people, having seen first-hand the exposure of the lies and carefully-manufactured hysteria on which the anti-Iraq campaign were built, is understandably a bit more skeptical about the same-ol' same-ol' coming from the same old Zio-Nazi sources as before.  Furthermore, the grossly underestimated costs of the Iraq war and the repeatedly-failed predictions of victory in the Afghan war, have probably left them a bit soured on the war cheerleading that these Israeli shills are pumping out for mass distribution.  There is even the risk of an anti-Israel, anti-ZioNazi backlash which is now appearing fairly regularly in the posted comments to stories about the region, which the MSM is doing everything to ignore and black out.

However, I think the biggest disincentive now for the "American people," whose opinion doesn't really matter much anyway, is the sheer cost of taking on Iran, particularly after the failure to subdue either Iraq or Afghanistan.  Even the elite who run the country have to realize that the money for a third war just isn't there.

Long-term, the elite usually gets the war it wants, and if the US ever manages to pull its economy back from the brink, they will again get their war by hook or by crook.  The only hope the Iranians have is to develop nukes and delivery systems capable of hitting major US cities, the sooner the better.   If NYC or LA is at stake, there is no possible way the US will consider war with Iran, even if they know they can obliterate Iran in retaliation for any strike on major US cities.  Even the obliteration of all of Iran would not bring back NYC or LA, , and there is no way that the US has any interest at stake in its dispute with Iran that would justify the loss of either city.

<<Unfortunately they have the power to stand against their own people for quite a while. >>

That's nothing - - the War Party has monopolized its power over the American sheeple since the end of WWII.  It's permanently ensconced.

<<These attackers are not successfull and I wouldn't expect them to be for years , but as the years go by the reasons to fight the government might pile up and include more of the people.>>

That's assuming the Iranian government never changes, and never accommodates.  An absurd assumption, they have already moved from the Bakhtiar government to the Islamic Republic of the mullahs, and even amongst the mullahs, there is dissent and disagreement.

[Plane]

"...the American people are not "motivated to destroy them."  My guess is that the American people don't give a shit about destroying them, but that a small coterie of neo-cons, slavishly devoted to the destruction of Israel's enemies, are working feverishly as they did with Iraq to whip up anti-Iranian war fever among the American people.

What could possibly serve this purpose better than Iranian atom bombs?


Supposeing that such Neo cons do exist , how are they manipulateing the Iranian authoritys to engender so much hatred and fear?

[Michael Tee]

<<What could possibly serve this purpose better than Iranian atom bombs?>>

WTF do the American people really care if the Iranians have atom bombs?  America has its own A-bombs, are Americans such hypocrites that they would condemn Iran for seeking the very weapons which they themselves and many other nations already have?  I didn't realize that you had such a low opinion of your fellow Americans.


<<Supposeing that such Neo cons do exist , how are they manipulateing the Iranian authoritys to engender so much hatred and fear?>>

LOL.  It isn't the Iranians that the neo-cons can manipulate, their influence in Iran is, as you may have guessed, nil.  They are manipulating the American people by trying to whip up anti-Iranian war fever, primarily because it serves the interests of Israel, to which they are fiercely devoted.  When you think about it, it is absurd for America, the world's no. 1 nuclear power, to have any fear at all of Iran. 

[Plane]

<<What could possibly serve this purpose better than Iranian atom bombs?>>

WTF do the American people really care if the Iranians have atom bombs? 

You can't answer the question?


Really there is not anything that can excite hatred and fear better than a-bombs. I am an aircraft worker so I know how much less they can deliver than we , but in the US and Iran there are only just so many who understand how useless a small number of these wepons without a practical delivery are.

Iranians who are jingoistic can puff up with false confidence , Americans who are worried arn't comforted by the math.

[Christians4LessGvt]

WTF do the American people really care if the Iranians have atom bombs?  America has its own A-bombs, are Americans such hypocrites that they would condemn Iran for seeking the very weapons which they themselves and many other nations already have?  

Yeah why would anyone, a country, or a team care if their arch enemy gets stronger?
It is soooooo illogical to not want an enemy to get stronger.  
Heck we should hope all our enemies get stronger and stronger!
In fact I hope the burglar that wants to break down my door has the proper tools.
heck if the burglar only has a crow bar maybe I should not care if gets a sledgehammer!
I mean I have a sledgehammer so who the hell am I to not want him to have one?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Just look at a map. Iran is too far away to have any territorial ambitions on the US. Iran, being the leader of Shia Islam, naturally has an interest in supporting the Shiites of Iraq. Iran and Iraq have a common history that goes back thousands of years. The US cannot move Iraq away from Iran, nor convert Iraqis to Mormons or Presbyterians.

Israel, Israel's expansionist policy, and Israel's nukes are the main reason we are bombarded with this on the other.anti-Iranian propaganda. Of course, Iran could not use nukes against Israel without killing a LOT of Palestinians. Neither Israel or Iran could have any territorial ambitions.

These constant bogus Debkafiles and possibly the bomb that went off near Ahmedinejad, and the blowing up of the plant are all most likely ways in which the US (and maybe Israel, which surely has more plants in the Iranian government) are sending messages to Iran. Since they have not caused a war, this is pretty much acceptable. The Iranian government is neither democratic nor rational in its actions and especially in its rhetoric. Neither is the US, for that matter. There have been no referenda on foreign policy nor even votes in Congress about policy, ever, in any administration.So I think I can say that US foreign policy is undemocratic and always has been. At least since the defeat of the League of Nations.
 

[Christians4LessGvt]

Just look at a map. Iran is too far away to have any territorial ambitions on the US.

Thats the problem with Liberals, they never can see beyond the next street corner.
Of course Iran is not about to invade the United States.
But they are exporting terrorism, weapons, and money all over the globe to enemies of the Western World.
They want to destabilize regional regimes so they can spread Islamic Theocracies throughout the world.
And if you think that would stop if Isreal ceased to exist I have some swamp land to sell you!



State Department: Iran supports Taliban, Iraqi militants

By Thomas Joscelyn

August 6, 2010

The State Department released its Country Reports on Terrorism for 2009 on Thursday. The analysis, which details terrorist events in the previous calendar year, was supposed to be provided to Congress by April 30. But this year the report was not published until August.

As expected, Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2009. In particular, Tehran continues to sponsor terrorists who kill American servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to the State Department, Iran trains and arms the Taliban, does the same for Iraqi militants targeting US forces, and provides safe haven for al Qaeda members. The State Department does not use the term 'safe haven' to describe Iran's sheltering of al Qaeda leaders and members, however.

Much of the State Department?s reporting on Iran remained unchanged from the year before -- with one noteworthy difference. Only in its reporting on the relationship between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda did this year's report differ substantively from last year?s analysis.

Iran's Qods Force, which is part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is the regime's primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad, the State Department noted. Among other terrorist organizations, the Qods Force continues to support the Taliban. This year's report states:

Iran's Qods Force provided training to the Taliban in Afghanistan on small unit tactics, small arms, explosives, and indirect fire weapons. Since at least 2006, Iran has arranged arms shipments to select Taliban members, including small arms and associated ammunition, rocket propelled grenades, mortar rounds, 107mm rockets, and plastic explosives.
This language is nearly identical to that which appeared in the report for 2008. What the State Department didn' say is that Iran also allows the Taliban to move foreign fighters through Iran to Afghanistan, where they fight Coalition forces. There is also evidence that the Iranians are helping the Taliban and al Qaeda execute suicide attacks by, among other things, providing explosives and other components used in suicide vests.
There was a change in the State Department?s language regarding the nexus between Iran and al Qaeda, however. Here is how the State Department?s latest report describes the relationship (emphasis added):

Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qaida (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to ublicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its AQ detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial; it is reportedly holding Usama bin Ladin?s family members under house arrest.

Here is how the State Department summarized the relationship in its report on 2008 (emphasis added):
Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa?ida members it has detained, and has refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody. Iran has repeatedly resisted numerous calls to transfer custody of its al-Qa?ida detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for trial. Iran also continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qa?ida members who fled to Iran following the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Both descriptions are incomplete and do not reflect the totality of collusion between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda. But last year's report noted that Iran continued to fail to control the activities of some al-Qaida members that is, they are allowed to operate on Iranian soil.

This year, the State Department dropped that language and only noted that some of Osama bin Laden's family members are "under house arrest."

It is not clear what was behind the change. We do know that the Iranians did not hold all of Osama bin Laden's family members under house arrest. Saad bin Laden, for example, left Iran for northern Pakistan in late 2008. Moreover, al Qaeda members supposedly under "house arrest" in Iran have continued to operate, holding planning meetings and engaging in various other nefarious activities.

The State Department avoided using the phrase 'safe haven' in either analysis. But by refusing to identify, transfer, or 'bring to justice' al Qaeda members, that is precisely what the Iranian regime is providing al Qaeda.

Finally, the State Department included a lengthy paragraph on Iran?s support for terrorists in Iraq. It is mostly unchanged from the year before (emphasis added):

Despite its pledge to support the stabilization of Iraq, Iranian authorities continued to provide lethal support, including weapons, training, funding, and guidance, to Iraqi Shia militant groups that targeted U.S. and Iraqi forces. The Qods Force continued to supply Iraqi militants with Iranian-produced advanced rockets, sniper rifles, automatic weapons, and mortars that have killed Iraqi and Coalition Forces, as well as civilians. Iran was responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces by providing militants with the capability to assemble explosively formed penetrators that were designed to defeat armored vehicles. The Qods Force, in concert with Lebanese Hizballah, provided training outside of Iraq and advisors inside Iraq for Shia militants in the construction and use of sophisticated improvised explosive device technology and other advanced weaponry.

There is one change in the paragraph above from the version that appeared in last year's analysis. Last year, the State Department said that Iran was responsible for "some of the lethality of anti-Coalition attacks." This year's report says that Iran is "responsible for the increased lethality of some attacks on U.S. forces." It is not clear what was driving the word change.

The bottom line is that Iran is still supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants in Iraq in their attacks on civilians and US-led forces.


Read more: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2010/08/state_department_ira.php#ixzz0vqU0nDsB

[sirs]

WTF do the American people really care if the Iranians have atom bombs?  America has its own A-bombs, are Americans such hypocrites that they would condemn Iran for seeking the very weapons which they themselves and many other nations already have?  

Yeah why would anyone, a country, or a team care if their arch enemy gets stronger?
It is soooooo illogical to not want an enemy to get stronger. 

Ahhhh, Cu4 has caught on to the dirty little secret.  You'll note on many an occasion, Tee's desire to see the U.S. get itself beat up, both militarily and economically, not to menion seeing Israel get wiped out of the region.  Anything that can strengthen an enemy of the U.S. &/or Israel, this being Islamofascism & Radicalized Islam, then by all means.  The more A-bombs made, the better.  The more used on Americans or Israelis, the better.  They simply have it coming

[Xavier_Onassis]

If the US is clandestinely blowing up bombs to  scare the Hell out of Ahmedinejad and sabotaging Iran's nuclear programs, then what would you expect the Iranians to do? Send the CIA candygrams? Iran cannot attack the US directly, and the US cannot attack Iran. Iran wants to dominate the region, as Henry Kissinger and the Shah conspired to do long ago, and the US also wants to dominate the same region. I like that title "Longwar Journal" because it indicates what the US has been about: to maintain a constant war threat from some other power, because it keeps the people feeling insecure, and insecure people buy more sh*t. Note that Americans have been even induced to buy more than their incomes allow, just to buy more sh*t and feel somehow more secure.

The Chinese, even with a totalitarian government, seem to feel really secure, as they save huge amounts of their meager incomes.

Maintaining both consumerism and the military industrial complex is FAR more important to those who really run this country than anything a puny country like Iran could ever do to the US.

You, CU4, and simply a puppet, pretending that you are free when you jump every time Debkafiles or some reactionary radio rantster tells you of the Impending Islamic Doom. Which is, by the way, a passing farce staged by a small minority. Iran is mostly reacting to an economic war behind the scenes by the US to dominate Iran and force it to obey the same oligarchy that runs the US. It is debatable whether the Iranians would be better off if they went along, because the mullahs are so  grotesquely incompetent and corrupt.

But all this Debkafiles crap is just propaganda intended to keep phony cowboys like you thinking that the reins in their hands actually served any purpose.

But, of course, they don't

[sirs]

Now, of course, Xo will provide the proof that such explosions were the direct result of U.S. and/or Israel involvement, thus justifying the need for Iran to continue on their way of developing Atom Bimbs

[Christians4LessGvt]

intended to keep phony cowboys like you thinking that the reins in their hands

I knew I liked this song!

Toby Keith Should've Been A Cowboy

[Michael Tee]

plane asks me:  <<You can't answer the question?>>

plane, your question was:  <<What could possibly serve this purpose better than Iranian atom bombs?>>

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the purpose to which you referred ("this purpose") was the whipping up of anti-Iranian war fever in America, was it not?

I answered your question as follows, and you quoted that answer as well:  <<WTF do the American people really care if the Iranians have atom bombs? >>

I consider that my answer, which you yourself quoted accurately, was a full and complete answer to your question.  I do not understand why you would imply that I was unable to answer your question.  Are you not able to understand my answer?  It was a rhetorical question, the import of which was, "The American people really don't give a shit whether the Iranians have nukes or not, so the possession of atomic weapons by the Iranians should not be considered a legitimate justification for anti-Iranian war fever."  

Of course, the Zio-Nazi propagandists, ever ready to sucker the  U.S. again and again into taking Israel's side and fighting Israel's enemies, no matter how much to America's detriment, (and they have cost America trillions of dollars and thousands of lives to date) will nevertheless continue to try to whip up anti-Iranian war fever exactly as they did in the case of Iraq, by inciting spurious and ridiculous fears of nations that would never threaten the American homeland, but have more right than America to seek hegemony in their own region.


<<Really there is not anything that can excite hatred and fear better than a-bombs.>>

That is just nonsense.  The sentiment against the Japs and Nazis of WWII was intense, and derived from their total abandonment of all principles of mercy and humanity in their treatment of conquered populations.  Had nothing to do with nuclear or other weapons and in fact was much more intense than the feeling against either Iraq or Iran.  

<< I am an aircraft worker so I know how much less they can deliver than we , but in the US and Iran there are only just so many who understand how useless a small number of these wepons without a practical delivery are.>>

So instead of spreading irrational, hysterical fear to the public, why don't these Zio-Nazi neo-cons say what you already know, that the absence of viable delivery systems makes possession of these weapons by Iran virtually irrelevant to America?

<<Iranians who are jingoistic can puff up with false confidence , Americans who are worried arn't comforted by the math.>>

So what you're basically saying is that well-informed Americans don't give a shit about the Iranian nuclear program, but that the fears being whipped up are irrational and deceitful, based on a total disregard for relevant facts like the importance of delivery systems.  Whose interests do you think are served by those who whip up fear and hatred of Iran based on a "nuclear threat" which in fact does not exist because they can't deliver the nukes to America?