I'm not on the Iran bomb plot bandwagon yet.

By D.C.

 Many Conservative commentators have been quick to jump on the "Iranian bomb plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US" story bandwagon,citing this as another example of Iran's evil intentions.(Take a read of the Wall Street Journal.)

 They say this is akin to an act of war and at least make the implication we must take military action against Iran for this.If the story is true,then perhaps it is an act of war.I question the truth of the whole thing.

 I would remind these Conservatives that this whole story is out of the Eric Holder Dept.of Justice.Holder is the same incompetent boob who Congress is investigating for "Fast and Furious".Just the day before this Iran story broke,Conservatives,myself included,were calling for Holder's head on a platter.

 Now,the Iran story broke and Holder,the incompetent boob who oversaw "Fast and Furious",is some kind of national hero? I am now supposed to believe this idiot Holder,given his track record ?

 I do agree that Iran has evil intentions toward America.I also agree that Iran cannot be allowed to build a nuclear bomb and if we have to use military force to stop them,then so be it.But,I am highly skeptical of this story.If it smells like a rotten fish,then it probably is a rotten fish.

 I am not the only skeptic,here are a few examples and these are lefties:

 This from the NY Times,"U.S. challenged to explain accusations of Iran plot in face of skepticism."

 Here the Times points out the plot "mastermind",Mr.Arbabsiar,seems to be an unlikely terrorist,"Unlikely turn for a suspect in terror plot." They basically tell the story of a guy who lived in the US for 30 years,had a string of failed businesses and certainly wasn't a radical Muslim considering they said he smoked pot and drank liquor.

 Salon's Jeff Morley questions the credibility of the un-named "paid" informant in the case with this,"Are the Iranian terror charges a Mexican "Curveball" ?".Of course,Morley is refering to the infamous CIA informant "Curveball" whose information on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was the justification for the invasion of Iraq.We now know "Curveball" was full of "it".If you don't know what "it" is,just put "sh" in front of the "it".

 Those are just a few examples.You can go to any number of lefty websites and see that many are not buying this story.Take a look at the Huffington Post or the Daily Kos.Well,don't look at the Daily Kos,but you get my point.I give them credit for this.

 All I hear from the right is the Neo Con hawks who so badly want to start yet another war (that we can't afford) and silence from the traditional Conservatives.Why? We on the right should be calling BS on this whole story,and we should be doing it loudly.

 Washington Post columnist and Obama shill,David Ignatius,explains away all those fishy questions about the Iran bomb plot story with his piece,"Those Keystone Iranians".

 Of course,both the NY Times and the Washington Post's editorial boards buy the story hook,line and sinker.The Times is a little more timid than the Post,but both say some action must be taken against Iran.The Times does use it as an opportunity to take a shot at George Bush,basically saying that they are glad Obama,with his calm and cool,is the President and not that shoot first ask questions later cowboy Bush.You can read those editorials here and here.

 My favorite liberal,or at least one of the few whose work I really respect,Glenn Greenwald,totally dismisses the Iranian bomb plot as utter bull crap in Salon,"The "very scary" Iranian terror plot".( I have a lot of respect for Greenwald because he has been one of the only vocal liberal critics of Obama regarding civil liberties.)

 Greenwald's piece has this hilarious opening;

"The most difficult challenge in writing about the Iranian Terror Plot unveiled yesterday is to take it seriously enough to analyze it. Iranian Muslims in the Quds Force sending marauding bands of Mexican drug cartel assassins onto sacred American soil to commit Terrorism — against Saudi Arabia and possibly Israel — is what Bill Kristol and John Bolton would feverishly dream up while dropping acid and madly cackling at the possibility that they could get someone to believe it."

 Oh,come now.Don't be upset just because he joked about a couple of big government Neo-Cons,that was funny and true.Greenwald goes on with this;

"To begin with, this episode continues the FBI’s record-setting undefeated streak of heroically saving us from the plots they enable. From all appearances, this is, at best, yet another spectacular “plot” hatched by some hapless loser with delusions of grandeur but without any means to put it into action except with the able assistance of the FBI, which yet again provided it through its own (paid, criminal) sources posing as Terrorist enablers. The Terrorist Mastermind at the center of the plot is a failed used car salesman in Texas with a history of pedestrian money problems. Dive under your bed."

 I know it drives my Conservative friends crazy,when I go all Civil Libertarian on them,but Greenwald is dead right on this.

 First of all,federal law enforcement sets people up all the time using "paid" informants to "encourage" folks to do illegal things that they wouldn't have done on their own.Remember a guy named Randy Weaver? I guess Conservatives don't remember his story.

 While I refuse to defend Weaver's white supremacist beliefs and I think they are disgusting,he has a Constitutional right to believe those things.His is a classic case of the government using a "paid" informant to entrap someone.The outcome of his case proves the government was wrong in what they did.I won't bring up Waco,I think I made my point.

 Second,Why does a person become an informant anyway? Because they are already a criminal who is in trouble with the law.Then the government pays them to do their dirty work.

 So we have a person,the informant,he already has or is trying to get out of serious criminal charges by working for the government.This person needs protection from the government so the rat isn't killed by those he ratted out.The person is also getting a paycheck from Uncle Sam.I don't know what the union scale is for a rat is,but I doubt this person is getting paid minimum wage.The government has this person "on the hook".

 Maybe I am a goof,but these seem to me to be very strong motivations to make your boss happy.I wouldn't want to loose that job,considering that if I lost that job,I'd probably end up dead or lucky if I go to prison for only 20 years.If I was in that situation,I reckon I would do whatever I needed to do to get out of it.And don't lie,you would too.

 Why would anyone,especially judges and juries,take any "paid" informant seriously? Because the government told them to? For the life of me,I can't understand why judges,left or right wing,allow testimony from "paid" witnesses in court.Any person who claims to be a right winger or a member of the Tea Party should be outraged by these things.

 In much the same way that liberals are constantly looking for right wing examples of racism,if law enforcement looks hard enough for terrorists,guess what? They will find one.Even if they have to set somebody up.I think,besides eroding public confidence in federal law enforcement,that tactics like this actually undermine their overall effort.

 I can talk about robbing a bank,that does not make me guilty of robbing a bank.I will remind my Conservative friends that the Constitution does not tell me what I can or cannot do.The Constitution tells the government what it cannot do to me.I think Conservatives need to honestly look at themselves and remember what we say we stand for.

To be totally honest,I reckon this guy,Mr.Arbabsiar,is guilty of something,probably of being stupid and greedy.Being stupid and greedy can get you a lot of years in prison.Even Eric Holder is not dumb enough to bring these charges forward without some merit.I can throw aside almost all the facts of this story,but the one thing that smells fishy to me is this.The money.

 I'll give Holder the benefit of the doubt,until I hear the facts spelled out in open court.But Holder needs to prove the rotten fish belongs to Iran before I pass judgement.

 Until then,I won't be jumping on the bandwagon.