Iran claims to have broken up US funded terrorist group

motivez · 05-19-2008, 05:13 PM

Iran busts CIA terror network
Tehran Times Political Desk

TEHRAN - The Intelligence Ministry on Saturday released details of the detection and dismantling of a terrorist network affiliated to the United States.

In a coordinated operation on May 7, Iranian intelligence agents arrested the terrorist network’s members, who were identified in Fars, Khuzestan, Gilan, West Azerbaijan, and Tehran provinces, the Intelligence Ministry announcement said.

The group’s plans were devised in the U.S., according to the announcement, which added that they had planned to carry out a number of acts such as bombing scientific, educational, and religious centers, shooting people, and making public places in various cities insecure.

One of the terrorists was killed in the operation, but the rest are in detention, the Intelligence Ministry said, adding that the group’s main objective was to create fear among the people.

The United States Central Intelligence Agency comprehensively supported the terrorist group by arming it, training its members, and sponsoring its inhumane activities in Iran, the Intelligence Ministry stated.

The terrorists had maps, films, pictures, and sketches of important and sensitive sites in various cities in their possession when they were arrested.

They also had a large number of weapons and ammunition and a great deal of highly explosive chemicals and cyanide.

The blast at a religious center in Shiraz last month was carried out by this group, and it also had plans to carry out similar attacks on the Tehran International Book Fair, the Russian Consulate in Gilan Province, oil pipelines in southern Iran, and other targets, the communiqué stated.

Thirteen people were killed and over 190 others wounded in a bombing carried out on April 12 at the Rahpuyan-e Vessal religious center, which is part of the Seyyed-ul-Shohada Mosque complex, located in a residential area of Shiraz.

Now, granted the source is the Tehran Times, so take that for what you will.. be considering our long history of being involved in Iran, and the CIA's long history of funding these types of groups (Nicaragua, etc).. I don't find this that unlikely.

And, if it's true, how does this make us any better than the groups we're trying to find? If these people are setting bombs and killing innocent people in their attacks (which they seem to be), how are we better than Al Qaeda who does the same thing?

There was an article that came out awhile back (I'll try to find it, from a more mainstream news source) that claimed were funding these types of groups to create chaos in Iran because of our concern over their nuclear program / involvement in Iraq.. which makes this even more likely.

If it turns out this is true, is it even legal for us to be funding groups like this?

motivez · 05-19-2008, 05:51 PM

Found the article:

US funds terror groups to sow chaos in Iran
By William Lowther in Washington DC and Colin Freeman
Last Updated: 12:18AM GMT 25/02/2007

America is secretly funding militant ethnic separatist groups in Iran in an attempt to pile pressure on the Islamic regime to give up its nuclear programme.

In a move that reflects Washington's growing concern with the failure of diplomatic initiatives, CIA officials are understood to be helping opposition militias among the numerous ethnic minority groups clustered in Iran's border regions.

The operations are controversial because they involve dealing with movements that resort to terrorist methods in pursuit of their grievances against the Iranian regime.

In the past year there has been a wave of unrest in ethnic minority border areas of Iran, with bombing and assassination campaigns against soldiers and government officials.

Such incidents have been carried out by the Kurds in the west, the Azeris in the north-west, the Ahwazi Arabs in the south-west, and the Baluchis in the south-east. Non-Persians make up nearly 40 per cent of Iran's 69 million population, with around 16 million Azeris, seven million Kurds, five million Ahwazis and one million Baluchis. Most Baluchis live over the border in Pakistan.

Funding for their separatist causes comes directly from the CIA's classified budget but is now "no great secret", according to one former high-ranking CIA official in Washington who spoke anonymously to The Sunday Telegraph.

His claims were backed by Fred Burton, a former US state department counter-terrorism agent, who said: "The latest attacks inside Iran fall in line with US efforts to supply and train Iran's ethnic minorities to destabilise the Iranian regime."

Although Washington officially denies involvement in such activity, Teheran has long claimed to detect the hand of both America and Britain in attacks by guerrilla groups on its internal security forces. Last Monday, Iran publicly hanged a man, Nasrollah Shanbe Zehi, for his involvement in a bomb attack that killed 11 Revolutionary Guards in the city of Zahedan in Sistan-Baluchistan. An unnamed local official told the semi-official Fars news agency that weapons used in the attack were British and US-made.

Yesterday, Iranian forces also claimed to have killed 17 rebels described as "mercenary elements" in clashes near the Turkish border, which is a stronghold of the Pejak, a Kurdish militant party linked to Turkey's outlawed PKK Kurdistan Workers' Party.

John Pike, the head of the influential Global Security think tank in Washington, said: "The activities of the ethnic groups have hotted up over the last two years and it would be a scandal if that was not at least in part the result of CIA activity."

Such a policy is fraught with risk, however. Many of the groups share little common cause with Washington other than their opposition to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose regime they accuse of stepping up repression of minority rights and culture.

The Baluchistan-based Brigade of God group, which last year kidnapped and killed eight Iranian soldiers, is a volatile Sunni organisation that many fear could easily turn against Washington after taking its money.

A row has also broken out in Washington over whether to "unleash" the military wing of the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK), an Iraq-based Iranian opposition group with a long and bloody history of armed opposition to the Iranian regime.

The group is currently listed by the US state department as terrorist organisation, but Mr Pike said: "A faction in the Defence Department wants to unleash them. They could never overthrow the current Iranian regime but they might cause a lot of damage."

At present, none of the opposition groups are much more than irritants to Teheran, but US analysts believe that they could become emboldened if the regime was attacked by America or Israel. Such a prospect began to look more likely last week, as the UN Security Council deadline passed for Iran to stop its uranium enrichment programme, and a second American aircraft carrier joined the build up of US naval power off Iran's southern coastal waters.

The US has also moved six heavy bombers from a British base on the Pacific island of Diego Garcia to the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, which could allow them to carry out strikes on Iran without seeking permission from Downing Street.

While Tony Blair reiterated last week that Britain still wanted a diplomatic solution to the crisis, US Vice-President Dick Cheney yesterday insisted that military force was a real possibility.

"It would be a serious mistake if a nation like Iran were to become a nuclear power," Mr Cheney warned during a visit to Australia. "All options are still on the table."

The five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany will meet in London tomorrow to discuss further punitive measures against Iran. Sanctions barring the transfer of nuclear technology and know-how were imposed in December. Additional penalties might include a travel ban on senior Iranian officials and restrictions on non-nuclear business.

Additional reporting by Gethin Chamberlain.

US funds terror groups to sow chaos in Iran - Telegraph

So, seems like Iran's claim really isn't very far fetched, and it's actually rather likely. Some think tanks are saying that if we don't have a hand in it, that it's a mistake.

It's really disturbing to me that we've sunk so low as to support groups that carry out attacks killing innocent people. How can we claim to be fighting a "war on terrorism" when we're actively helping terrorist groups kill innocent people?

IminWonderland · 05-19-2008, 05:53 PM

I don't think it's legal, but we've been doing it for YEARS.

And everytime we do it, it sucks for them and us. This is what creates terrorists.

Someone needs to watch Ironman, that was a good example of the problems with our government funding other entities. If we only funded ourselves, and became self reliant, instead of depending on ME stability, we wouldn't have half the problems we do now.

We created so many of our current problems, it's like a big joke overseas. In Hertsgaard's article: The Oblivious Empire, he writes:

America, foreigners say, is a trigger-happy bully that is both out for itself and full of itself. It feels no obligation to obey international law; it often pushes other countries around, forcing on them policies and sometimes tyrannical leaders that serve only American interest, and then, if they resist to much, it may bomb obedience into them with cruise missles...Less sentimental observers point out that this is how the strong have treated the weak throughout history. But, they add, what makes the UNited States uniquely annoying is its self-righteous insistence that it does nothing of the kind, that it is the epitome of evenhanded virtue and selfless generosity - the Beacon of Democracy that other nations should thank and emulate." (1018)

Smull · 05-19-2008, 06:15 PM

It may be true but I find it to be kind of a stretch, the CIA was largely roped in after it got carried away during the height of the cold war. It was pretty much exposed for what it was (see the Church Committee Report) and its activity kinda died down after that. However they did have a resurgence when this whole War on Terror thing got under way. (Just take a look at how they took down the Taliban in Afghanistan) And we did that through funding a rebel group as well. But I find it hard to believe that the CIA is actively supporting a terrorist group (again). I'm not ruling it out, I'm sure the CIA has been very busy with Iran, but I need to see more convincing evidence than the Tehran Times to believe that they are actively targeting civilians. This is likely Iranian propaganda or perhaps there is some link but its being blown out of proportion.

May God help us if I'm wrong.

Donkey® · 05-19-2008, 07:46 PM

I have no doubts we're guilty of a great deal of shit (supporting terrorist groups, torture, general bullshit) and we look completely stupid claiming we don't or claiming victim constantly when our actions are almost always responsible for attacks against us.

DosEquis · 05-19-2008, 08:41 PM

They are not terrorists when we support them. They are freedom fighters and rebels. See mujahideen. Ron Reagan called these guys "freedom fighters".

Smull · 05-19-2008, 11:19 PM

I'm not talking about the U.S. supporting rebels or any group that fights against a hostile government. We've done this and its very likely we're doing it right now. (Not that I'm ok with it, but thats another discussion) But what this article implies is a group which is purposely targeting civilians to advance a political agenda, which is more or less the definition of terrorism. I'm not yet ready to believe the CIA is actively supporting terrorist groups in Iran.

nbiggershaft · 05-20-2008, 12:50 AM

Doesn't really surprise me, we have been supporting efforts for a democratic Iran for some time now. We prolly gave them money and guns and now are shaking our heads with what they are doing with them. Seems to be the story of the last 50 years.

nbiggershaft · 05-20-2008, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by Smull

I'm not talking about the U.S. supporting rebels or any group that fights against a hostile government. We've done this and its very likely we're doing it right now. (Not that I'm ok with it, but thats another discussion) But what this article implies is a group which is purposely targeting civilians to advance a political agenda, which is more or less the definition of terrorism. I'm not yet ready to believe the CIA is actively supporting terrorist groups in Iran.

The 'actively' part is where you are probably right.

Kytro · 05-20-2008, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by Smull

But what this article implies is a group which is purposely targeting civilians to advance a political agenda, which is more or less the definition of terrorism. I'm not yet ready to believe the CIA is actively supporting terrorist groups in Iran.

Many rebel groups activelyt target civilians. My guess is the CIA isn't too picky about who they fund

IminWonderland · 05-20-2008, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Many rebel groups activelyt target civilians. My guess is the CIA isn't too picky about who they fund

Our government has not cared about civilian deaths for a while. Their focus is on our "interests."

motivez · 05-20-2008, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

Doesn't really surprise me, we have been supporting efforts for a democratic Iran for some time now. We prolly gave them money and guns and now are shaking our heads with what they are doing with them. Seems to be the story of the last 50 years.

Shaking our heads with what they're doing with them?

Like we didn't expect it, because there's no history of doing it that would have possibly alerted us to the perils of engaging in such an action?

I think it's more likely that the CIA and those in control of this program knew full well what was going to happen, they're not stupid (despite getting WMD in Iraq wrong), they know the history of these groups before getting involved with them, their methods, etc..

motivez · 05-20-2008, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Smull

I'm not talking about the U.S. supporting rebels or any group that fights against a hostile government. We've done this and its very likely we're doing it right now. (Not that I'm ok with it, but thats another discussion) But what this article implies is a group which is purposely targeting civilians to advance a political agenda, which is more or less the definition of terrorism. I'm not yet ready to believe the CIA is actively supporting terrorist groups in Iran.

Why not? There's a long history of it, there's been articles like I posted above from as recent as last year talking about our plans to fund these groups to do exactly what Iran has accused us of doing

When you consider our long history of funding rebels, groups, militias, etc, who are fighting against a government we don't like, regardless of their methodology or brutality.. It becomes very plausible IMO.

Smull · 05-20-2008, 06:59 PM

Unfortunately it is plausible.

But I really don't trust the Iranian government to tell me what the CIA is doing.

Iran: Britain, U.S. helped mosque bombers - CNN.com

This CNN article about the same incident says that Iran also accuses Britain and Israel of helping to fund the terrorist groups. Now it may be that these 3 governments have all turned to supporting terrorists, or it may be that Iran is just spewing propaganda.

Look, I'm not ruling it out, I've done a lot of research on the CIA and I know they've been involved with some shady shit over the years. But I also know that the Iranian Intelligence Ministry isn't the most reliable source out there, and given how delicate the situation is and how extreme of a step this would be for the US to take, I can't take Iran's word for it.

motivez · 05-20-2008, 07:03 PM

How do you explain the article I linked from the UK Telegraph? It's from last year and corresponds perfectly to the details of this incident.

The US and the UK obviously work very close together, I don't think it's out of the question that, in collaboration with Israel's middle eastern spy network have funded and supported these groups

The US will never admit it, so we'll have to wait until decades later to find out of it's true, but I think the fact that there's a story from a reliable source from last year that so closely matches it is pretty good evidence.

Smull · 05-22-2008, 10:28 PM

yeah that telegraph article does chew a pretty big fuckin hole in my argument there...

An anonymous former high ranking CIA official and a former US State Department counter-terrorism agent both claim we're at the very least funding terrorists against Iran... Iunno, if theres any truth behind it its absolutely terrible. It does two things which harm the US far more than any small gains we have from destabilizing Iran's gov't
1. Makes us huge fucking hypocrites
2. Legitimizes terrorism as a tactic

It could be that terrorism along with guerrilla styled tactics insurgencies and counter insurgencies are the new face of warfare. If so there will be no more Desert Storm tank on tank "left hook" styled wars anymore. Instead the US will need to structure its army around Intelligence and Special Forces rather than using deplorable terrorist tactics. Afghanistan will be the model for this (we took out the Taliban with around 300 men on the ground in only 3 months, btw "Jawbreaker" is a great read on this if anyone is interested)

The other thing that strikes me as strange is why this isn't bigger news. I mean I've pretty much given up on the major networks, but I check several websites and blogs that are pretty good when it comes to this kinda stuff and this is the first I've heard of it. (Probably part of why I felt it wasn't credible "If it happened I would know" sorta thing)" sorta thing

nbiggershaft · 05-23-2008, 12:52 AM

Originally Posted by motivez

Shaking our heads with what they're doing with them?

Like we didn't expect it, because there's no history of doing it that would have possibly alerted us to the perils of engaging in such an action?

I think it's more likely that the CIA and those in control of this program knew full well what was going to happen, they're not stupid (despite getting WMD in Iraq wrong), they know the history of these groups before getting involved with them, their methods, etc..

What I am saying isn't without precident. Don't get me wrong, I am not defending what the CIA does. But you look at Cuba, Iraq, the Contra. We have a habit of giving aid to groups to accomplish a goal, then saying "fuck" when the accomplish it in the wrong way. I don't think we intended on gassing the Kurds, we definitely didn't intend on setting up communist cuba, but they are reckless at times with their support.

nbiggershaft · 05-23-2008, 12:54 AM

Certainly you wouldn't argue that the many, many people in Iran who want a democratic, more liberal Iran are on the side of right? Whether we fucked up by funding the people who tried to accomplish this goal by killing civilians is in question, as well as whether we knew they would do it ahead of time.

Smull · 05-23-2008, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by Smull

The other thing that strikes me as strange is why this isn't bigger news. I mean I've pretty much given up on the major networks, but I check several websites and blogs that are pretty good when it comes to this kinda stuff and this is the first I've heard of it. (Probably part of why I felt it wasn't credible "If it happened I would know" sorta thing)" sorta thing

Better late than never i guess...
ABC News: Pakistan May Turn Over U.S. 'Spies' to Iran