Document: Iran Caught Red-Handed Shipping Arms to Taliban

Source: ABC News Blotter

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran's proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

"It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that's doing it," said former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence "of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban."

But an analysis by a senior coalition official, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, concludes there is clear evidence of Iran's involvement.

"This is part of a considered policy," says the analysis, "rather than the result of low-level corruption and weapons smuggling."

Read more: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/06/document_iran_c.html

Ummm... that doesn't sound like proof to me.

I smell false flag

that means Bush really is a unificator - he's united traditional enemies to band together to attack us. Heckuva job, Georgie.

"Red-handed" use to mean "caught in the act", but evidently it means now, "We figure, you know, pretty much, that it has to be this, because...well, it fits in with our preconceived notions." This is such utter bullshit. Might the Iranian government be supplying the Taliban? They might. Might the Carlyle Group be supplying the Taliban? They might. (It is probably more likely the latter case, than the former) :evilgrin:

Your comment about the Carlyle Group probably holds more water than this BS.

let's see:

the comment came from former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant. That is, a guy who is an out of job propaganda tool. Clearly unbiased analysis.

Then there is a verified(?) analysis by a senior coalition official (who is so sure of the quality of his proof that he cannot be named, or even just say which part of the 'coalition' he is from), that was obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com.
More like "planted" maybe?

"This is part of a considered policy," says the analysis (that is, the analysis is interpreted by somebody who actually SAYS that...)

Really... this is getting more ridiculous by the minute.
Why don't they just start the bombing campaign and be done with it?
Most of the world that has anything to say wouldn't care about it anyway.

Somehow, that was okay.

just for instance.

listed will have morphed to nuclear by 6 pm eastern daylight time.

NATO forces? Has anyone ever heard them say there is a war on terrah targeting NATO forces before this?

On number 2 I am memorizing this - first news says

. heavy arms
. C4 explosives
. advanced roadside bombs

I am remembering that this doesn't invovle centrfuges or other stuff.

I also like 'red-handed'.

We went from the red of Communism to the red of Republicans.
Muslims and Mexicans are the new commies.
What is being shipped here is hate.

Moslem aiding Moslem to keep the invaders off their property and own their own earth resources.

If the U.S. and friends in Europe can't legally take their oil, the create hate to take it.

And our kids are part of the tools. Our taxes are the other - paying for their friends to get rich.

So watch them use a little media alchemy = arsenal to nukes by 6 pm.

ISLAM QALA, Iran-Afghanistan border - When Iran announced in February that it was undertaking a thorough regularization of aliens on its soil, ears in the West pricked up, but not much was read into it.

However, the subsequent expulsion of thousands of Afghan refugees indicates the twofold motive behind the move. First, Iran wanted to weaken Sunni-led insurgents in its bordering areas, and second, it believed that the return of the refugees would fuel the Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan.

The second calculation, compounded by a political miscalculation on the part of the Afghan government, has already borne fruit, in the process providing the United States with another area on which it needs to consult Tehran.

On April 23, Iran sent back 4,000 undocumented Afghans to Zaranj, Nimroz province, followed the next day by the same number. All of them had been living in the Iranian Sunni-dominated Zabol-Zahedan region of Sistan-Balochistan province and had originally hailed from Nimroz and Farah provinces. An estimated 1 million Afghan refugees live in Iran.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IF08Df01.html

Bush & the neocons have so destroyed America's credibility that even a statement by Richard Clarke isn't 24-karat comfort anymore. The Iranians may very well be doing all that's listed, but like other DU'ers I want solid proof. A bigger bunch of exaggerators & liars never sucked air, and they've proven they have no problem manipulating (if not outright forging) evidence to suit their screed. Where's the solid proof. Oops. Cheney has it in an undisclosed location for National Security reasons, I'm sure. :sarcasm:

Who needs a war? Who needs a new distraction? Who is in deep political trouble?


cui bono?

fundamentalist Sunni Muslims. Inconceivable.

I am not buying it, since historically, the Iranian gov. has despised the Taliban.

And what about Saudi support for the Sunnis in Iraq? That's the group that has directed the most firepower against American troops.

I am sure that Saudi Arabia could be "caught red-handed" in the same way, if we chose to look.

there are several teams on the chess board. Unfortunately, they came with proper chess pieces, and the US came with a bag of pick-up-sticks. What a hash.

To echo what you just said: IRAN IS SHIA AND THE TALIBAN IS SUNNI. THEY HATE EACH OTHER. THEY WOULD NOT EVER ALLY THEMSELVES AGAINST ANYONE.

It pays to read Asia Times...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IF08Ak01.html

"Meanwhile, in a direct rebuttal of recent reports, eg in the Washington Post, about Iran's alleged supply of arms to the Taliban, Afghan President Hamid Karzai told a joint press conference with US Defense Secretary Robert Gates at his side that he regarded Iran as "a very close friend" that has helped Afghanistan's reconstruction during the past five years.

Karzai called the allegations of Iran's pro-Taliban meddlings as "baseless", and even Gates reluctantly admitted that the US has no "proof" that Iran was supplying arms to Taliban, thus disputing the claim of a "senior US official" who told the Washington Post just last week that the US had solid evidence to this effect."

and two of the non-Pashtun ethnic groups (the Taliban are mostly Pashtun) the Hazaras and the Tajiks, are Persian-speaking.

...but murky and "misinterpreted" ("mistakes were made") when it doesn't.

I guess they learned two lessons:

(1) Don't claim a rogue nation has weapons until you get them planted for certain (no more invasions based on speculation)

(2) Make sure the forged documents really don't look like forged documents!

Oh, and it helps to bring in a former critic to bolster your case.

A couple of notes:
The Taliban receives larger supplies of weapons through profits from opium dealing, officials say, but the Iranian presence could be significant.--Bush lifted the restrictions on poppy farming when he invaded Afghanistan...

The April convoy was tracked from Iran into Helmand province and led a fierce firefight that destroyed one vehicle, according to the official analysis. A second vehicle was reportedly found to contain small arms ammunition, mortar rounds and more than 650 pounds of C4 demolition charges.--nice use of the billion-dollar spy gadgetry and techniques we tax-payers have purchased. Too bad we can't use this to find OBL...

Why would the Iranians arm the people who are attacking Shiites in Iraq?

There is something about going into war that makes everyone love Bush all of the sudden. Perhaps they want to see if it will work again, nothing else will work.

To my knowledge, Iran has not invaded any countries in the last dozen years or so.

So what if they're arming people to fight us? Didn't we openly supply arms to Bin Laden and his pals to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan? Yet somehow the Soviets managed to refrain from taking military action against us.

:D

Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

On the other hand, it's Richard Clarke saying it. He's pretty credible, IMHO.

The first is never get involved in a land war in Asia"

What a great movie


Peace

that there was no clear link between Iran and the Taliban? I am certain it was released only a few weeks ago, and if this is legitimate, then that would certainly be a rather major change in such a short period of time.

:boring:
rocknation

....did not have evidence "of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban."

....blotter, "...concludes there is clear evidence of Iran's involvement."

....what is it, 'no evidence' or 'clear evidence'?....in bushco-world, we can have both at the same time....

I've learned that 100% unanimity on anything is a sign of dogma prevailing over reason.

Just a thought: we can hate on Bushco and still find fault with Iran. They're two separate issues.

Posted 6/9/2005 10:00 PM
Updated 6/9/2005 11:37 PM

By Barbara Slavin, USA TODAY
Members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards fought alongside and advised the Afghan rebels who helped U.S. forces topple Afghanistan's Taliban regime in the months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the guards' former leader says.

In an interview by e-mail, Mohsen Rezaie, a candidate in Iran's presidential elections next week, says the United States has not given Iran enough credit. He says Iran played an "important role in the overthrow of the Taliban" in 2001 (Related: Full text of interview).

Even before U.S. forces entered Afghanistan, Iran backed the Northern Alliance, a loose coalition of warlords and militias from the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara minorities. The alliance fought the ruling Taliban, a regime dominated by majority Pashtuns that imposed a harsh Sunni Islamic government.

Current and former U.S. troops and officials confirm Iranians were present with the Northern Alliance as U.S. forces organized the rebels in 2001. They say U.S. forces had no interaction with the Iranians. They deny the Iranians made meaningful contributions on the battlefield. ~snip~

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-06-09-iran-taliban_x.htm

~snip~
1996 ~snip~

September: Taliban seize Jalalabad, Sarobi, Asadabad, and Kabul, effectively taking control of Afghanistan. Iran, Russia, India, and central Asian states condemn takeover ~snip~

Oct. 31: Troops from Iran belonging to Ismael Khan land in Maimana to resist Taliban in the West ~snip~

1997 ~snip~

June 2: Taliban close Iranian Embassy in Kabul ~snip~

Sept. 4: ~snip~ Iran, Russia, and France accused by Taliban of helping opposition ~snip~

1998 ~snip~

Aug. 8: Taliban seize Mazar-i-Sharif: eleven Iranian diplomates killed ~snip~

Aug. 18: Allegation by Aytollah Khomeini of plot against Iran by Taliban. Tensions high between Taliban and Iran ~snip~

Sept. 1: Iran sends 70,000 troops to border with Afghanistan to carry out war games ~snip~

Sept. 6: Tensions escalate between Iran and Taliban: Iran declares it must protect its citizens ~snip~

Sept. 27: Taliban send 30,000 troops to border with Iran ~snip~

1999 ~snip~

May 5: Joint statement by Iran and Uzbekistan to challenge any takeover of Afghanistan by Taliban ~snip~

May 22: Taliban crush rebellion in Herat. Taliban accuse Iran of arming rebels ~snip~

http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/taliban_timeline.htm

Tuesday, Sep. 18, 2001 By TONY KARON

~snip~ Iran is implacably hostile to the Taliban over that movement's extremist theology and over its killing of Afghan Shiite Muslims. In 1999, Iran almost went to war against the Taliban after its militia killed eight Iranian diplomats and a journalist after capturing a predominantly Shiite town, and has worked together with Russia to support anti-Taliban opposition forces. Despite the overtures between the reformist president Mohammed Khatami and the West on ways of cooperating against terrorism, hard-line spiritual leader Ayatollah Khameini insisted that while Iran condemned the terror strikes in the U.S., Tehran could not support U.S. military action against Afghanistan. Still, whether working directly with the U.S. or not, Iran remains a key regional player in the anti-Taliban alliance.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,175372,00.html

Tuesday, March 06, 2001, updated at 09:44(GMT+8)

Iranian Majlis (parliament) issued a statement Monday condemning the Afghan Taliban decision to destroy ancient Buddhist statues throughout the country as being "counter- cultural" and "un-Islamic."

The statement, carried by the official IRNA news agency, decried that "those who pretend to be paragons of Islam (an allusion to puritan Islamism to which the Taliban claims to adhere), are seen committing such evil acts, now being implemented in full swing despite an international outcry. ~snip~

http://english.people.com.cn/english/200103/06/eng20010306_64217.html

10/23/03

A report on Al-Qaeda and Taliban prepared and submitted by Iran to the United Nations Security Council was released as an official document at the United Nations in New York on Wednesday, IRNA reported.

The report included names of 78 members linked to the Al-Qaeda terrorist network who had been arrested in Iran and then extradited to their countries of origin. ~snip~

http://www.payvand.com/news/03/oct/1141.html

4/12/07

TEHJRAN, Apr. 11 (ISNA)-Iran's parliament research center announced that the new process of establishing a government in Afghanistan could both present a threat or an opportunity to Iran.

This center in its recent report has noted that although the current government in Afghanistan has tried to prevent the regaining of power by Taliban, there are signs that this group is once again gaining power in Afghanistan, which is could pose as a threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

This report continues to note that the Islamic Republic of Iran so to prevent this issue should take serious political measures and place more effort in expanding mutual interested field with the current government in Afghanistan. ~snip~

http://www.payvand.com/news/07/apr/1125.html

Meanwhile, recall that the US sold weapons to Saddam Hussein. The past does not bind the future.

I wish more here disliked the Iranian theocracy. Currently, the Iranians have figured out how to prevail in the war of perception management. The mullahcratic vision of the future is not one I share.

eg in the Washington Post, about Iran's alleged supply of arms to the Taliban, Afghan President Hamid Karzai told a joint press conference with US Defense Secretary Robert Gates at his side that he regarded Iran as "a very close friend" that has helped Afghanistan's reconstruction during the past five years.

Karzai called the allegations of Iran's pro-Taliban meddlings as "baseless", and even Gates reluctantly admitted that the US has no "proof" that Iran was supplying arms to Taliban, thus disputing the claim of a "senior US official" who told the Washington Post just last week that the US had solid evidence to this effect ...'

Iran revisits the Khomeini legacy
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
Jun 8, 2007
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IF08Ak01.html

By Katherine Poythress
CNSNews.com Correspondent
June 06, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Although NATO forces recently intercepted two convoys moving Iranian-made weapons across Afghanistan, there is no clear evidence that Iran is supplying the Taliban with weapons, according to U.S. Army General Dan McNeill.

McNeill, the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), spoke live from Afghanistan at a Pentagon briefing Tuesday. He said it is not uncommon in Afghanistan to encounter weapons that originate in other countries ...

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200706/INT20070606a.html

guess he misses that Halliburton money...

maybe he wants to "retire" to the Carlyle Group like John Major and now Tony Blair...

maybe ABC "News" isn't paying enough.