The Iran Al Qaeda Relationship: Friends or Foes?

Iran's President Supports the 9/11 Truth Movement By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, October 5, 2011

Iran has consistently been accused of harboring Al Qaeda. The 911 Commission points to the Islamic Republic of Iran as one of the main "State sponsors" of the 9/11 attacks. In 2004, the 9/11 Commission confirmed that "there is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers."(911 Commission Report)  The media consensus is that since 9/11 a "decade-old relationship" has unfolded between Al Qaeda and the Tehran government:  "Throughout the war in Iraq, there was extensive intelligence that Iran was supporting the Mesopotamian branch of al Qaeda,... Yet it was only yesterday [July 2011] that the U.S. government formally acknowledged the connection between the world's most dangerous terrorist group and the leading state sponsor of terrorism. In a move by the Treasury Department, six members of a terrorist network based in Iran were sanctioned for serving as "the core pipeline through which al Qaeda moves money, facilitators and operatives from across the Middle East to South Asia," principally meaning Pakistan and Afghanistan. The leader of the group, Ezedin Abdul Aziz Khalil, is a Syrian who has been operating from Iran under an agreement signed in 2005. The sanctions will likely have little effect on the terror network, at least so long as its members remain in the Islamic Republic. But at least it ought to put to rest the idea that doctrinal differences all but forbid radical Sunnis to make common cause with radical Shiites. As in politics, terrorism can make strange bedfellows, especially when there's a shared hatred of the United States. The Obama Administration has come a long way since the days when it thought it could strike a "grand bargain" with Iran's mullahs, and yesterday's move is another good step. Above all, it's a reminder of why a regime that has no qualms serving as al Qaeda's facilitator can on no account be permitted to build a nuclear bomb. (Review & Outlook: Al Qaeda in Iran - WSJ, July 29, 2011) A broad bipartisan political consensus --shared by the White House, the US Congress, the Pentagon and the intelligence community-- prevails:  There is a "connection between the world's most dangerous terrorist group and the leading state sponsor of terrorism". Iran upholds Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda is a threat to America. Pari passu, an attack by Al Qaeda directed against the "American Homeland" is tantamount to an attack against the US by the Islamic Republic of Iran, "the leading state sponsor of terrorism". The Cheney-Rumsfeld Second 9/11: A Military Plan to "Fight Terrorism around the World" This diabolical notion that Tehran is behind Al Qaeda has been used, in the course of the last ten years, to provide a pretext and a justification for waging an all out war on Iran.. In April 2006, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld  launched a far-reaching military plan to fight terrorism around the World. The stated objective was to retaliate against the "leading state sponsors of terrorism", namely Iran and Syria. This plan was to be implemented in the case of a second major terrorist attack on America:   "[The plan] includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan. This plan details "what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off," said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. (emphasis added, Washington Post, 23 April 2006) The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack "which is lacking today" would usefully create both a "justification and an opportunity" to wage war on "some known targets [Iran and Syria]".  Also in 2006, as part of the same military agenda, Vice President Dick Cheney was reported to have instructed USSTRATCOM to draw up a contingency plan "to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States". Implied in Cheney's contingency plan was the certainty that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections. (Philip Giraldi, Attack on Iran: Pre-emptive Nuclear War , The American Conservative, 2 August 2005) The Cheney Plan was predicated on the presumption that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11 and that punitive bombings could immediately be activated, prior to the conduct of an investigation, much in the same way as the attacks on Afghanistan in October 2001, in retribution for the alleged support of the Taliban government to the 9/11 terrorists: "At a deeper level, it implies that “9/11-type terrorist attacks” are recognized in Cheney’s office and the Pentagon as appropriate means of legitimizing wars of aggression against any country selected for that treatment by the regime and its corporate propaganda-amplification system. ...  (Keefer, February 2006 ) Fragile Al Qaeda Legend. Iran's President Supports the 9/11 Truth Movement In recent developments, this broad political consensus that Iran ("the leading state sponsor of terrorism") is behind al Qaeda is in the process of breaking up. The President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has opened up a can a worms. His address at the UN General Assembly strikes at the very heart of US military doctrine. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad began by publicly pronouncing that 9/11 was a US government false flag operation [at the UN General Assembly]. Al-Qaeda responded by accusing Ahmadinejad of being a conspiracy theorist---a “9/11 truther”. Iran then replied in kind by pointing to CIA involvement with Al-Qaeda. This spectacle would be uproarious, if the actual stakes were not so high; if this war of words was not part of a much larger and very real war that places the future of the entire world at risk. What we are witnessing is a typical propaganda battle in which truth, lies and half-truths have been liberally mixed. Only the most clear-minded and astute observers can see the battle lines clearly. (Larry Chin, Al Qaeda versus Iran 'War of Words": 9/11 Truth Wielded as a Political Trump Card, September 30, 2011) In his 2010 address to the UN General Assembly, president Ahmadinejad had insinuated that Al Qaeda was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks. In this year's September 2011 address to the UN General Assembly, which also marks the tenth anniversary of the tragic events of 9/11, the president of Iran suggested, in no uncertain terms, that the September 11, 2011 attacks had been used as a pretext for launching the wars on both Afghanistan and Iraq. "Who used the mysterious September 11 incident as a pretext to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, killing, injuring, and displacing millions in two countries with the ultimate goal of bringing into its domination the Middle East and its oil resources?" In an interview with the Associated Press, president Ahmadinejad broadly endorsed the findings of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which claim that the WTC towers were brought down through controlled demolition. The Iranian president stated in an interview "that explosive material and not planes brought down the World Trade Center":  He stopped short of saying the United States staged the disaster, but said that as an engineer, he’s sure New York’s twin towers were not brought down by jetliners. "A few airplanes without previous co-ordination known to the security forces and the intelligence community in the United States cannot become missiles and target the heart of the United States," Ahmadinejad said. (http://thechronicleherald.ca/World/1265927.html ) The President of Iran is broadly sympathetic with the 9/11 Truth Movement. He believes that Al Qaeda is not behind the 9/11 attacks. In so doing, he also rejects the notion that Iran supports Al Qaeda and that Iran played a behind the scenes role in the 9/11 attacks. Al Qaeda's Response to the President of Iran's Statement Following his speech to the UN General Assembly, a spokesperson for Al Qaeda reacted in a scripted public relations article published on its English-language Internet magazine "Inspire". (published in Yemen by Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). In a carefully worded response to Ahmadinejad's UN statement, the author of the article describes Ahmadinejad as a crackpot "conspiracy theorist". In this "damage control" scripted response emanating from Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) (a known CIA intelligence asset), Ahmadinjad is described as "ridiculous". "Why would Iran ascribe to such a ridiculous belief that stands in the face of all logic and evidence?" asked the article’s author, Abu Suhail.  Ahmadinejad is accused of having "insulted the terrorist group by renewing past conspiratorial claims about the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon during his speech" to the United Nations General Assembly. (see Al Qaeda slams Iran for peddling 9/11 conspiracy theories | The Envoy - Yahoo! News, September 28, 2011)   "[According to Al Qaeda's spokesperson Abu Suhail] Late al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in his many audio and video messages praised the attacks several times and in 2004 he publicly acknowledged al-Qaida’s involvement....For Iran, anti-Americanism is merely a game of politics. It is anti-American when it suits it and it is a collaborator with the U.S. when it suits it," (Inspire Magazine, September 2011) The "Global War on Terrorism" propaganda stint leaked through the CIA's Al Qaeda operative in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has visibly backfired. From the Horse's Mouth: Al Qaeda candidly acknowledges its role in the 9/11 attacks, while at the same time denying Iran's involevement as a "state sponsor" of terrorism. In a twistedirony, these scripted Al Qaeda accusations have put to rest Washington's allegations that Iran supported Al Qaeda and was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Moreover, if Al Qaeda and Iran are longer friends, the Tehran government can no longer be upheld as "a state sponsor of terrorism". This in itself drives a wedge into the National Security Strategy, thecornerstone of which is based on "state sponsorship of terrorism" as a justification  for waging the "Global War on Terrorism" (GWOT).  Theater of the absurd: If the Islamic Republic of Iran is an enemy of Al Qaeda, pari passu the justification for waging a pre-emptive war on Iran falls flat, the "Global War on Terrorism" collapses like a deck of cards. Michel Chossudovsky's International Best Seller on 9/11 and "The Global War on Terrorism"