Join institutional investors, analysts and strategists from the world's largest banks: Subscribe today
Already have an account? log in
Iran Calls Aramco Attacks ‘Warning’ From Houthis, Denies Role In ‘9/11 For Saudi Arabia’
Iran sent a message to the US denying it was behind the attacks on Saudi Arabia's oil infrastructure just as the Saudis prepared to present what the kingdom says is evidence of Iranian involvement.
In the note, sent through the Swiss mission, Tehran warned the Trump administration that it will respond to strikes or any other retaliatory measures against the regime.
"They didn’t hit hospitals, schools or markets", Hassan Rouhani said in a cabinet meeting Wednesday, an apparent allusion to civ
God forbid that we should push false flag theories and conspiracies, and not trust the official source, that told us just a while back that Iran attacked a cargo ship with mines, until the captain of the Japanese vessel disproved it.
Yes, “God forbid”, (in this case, the owner of the web site) the pushing of false flag theories and conspiracies.
Heisenberg’s policy of presenting evidence first, and analysis second, is the correct order of things. The lack of evidence should not be replaced with conjecture.
Well, it’s that evidence that is not credible. It’s lack of credibility is not a matter of analysis but fact. Conjecture in this case is the “evidence” presented, the only difference being that it is government approved, and the other is healthy doubt and scepticism. Surely you are not suggesting we forego warranted scepticism in favour of “official statements”?
What everybody is suggesting, is that Iran is behind it one way or another, because if MBS blew up his own oil or if Mike Pompeo blew up MBS’s oil, then why would the Houthis continue to insist, every, single day that they were responsible, and why does Tehran keep congratulating the Houthis on their successful attack? Point being, the only question here is whether Saturday’s events amount to a direct Iran-on-Saudi Arabia attack (cause for a potential war), or an indirect, Iran-by-proxy attack (which happens all the time)
H, Iran supports the Houthis, morally logistically and financially. However the evidence that it is Iranian missiles or that Iran gave the order, or that Iran launched the missiles from Iraq or Kuwait, or wherever, which is what the US and the Saudis are saying is not there. The jump from moral and financial support to direct responsibility of the attack is made seamlessly and intentionally, and above all without a single shred of evidence. Just conjecture, ie Houthis shia, Iranians shia therefore Iran ordered it. Yemeni shia btw are nothing like Iranian shia, they are closer to sunni Islam than to Iranian shi’ism. Nor are they some inexperienced fighters that must have iranian expertise, they are battle hardened people. The US and Saudis have been seeking confrontation for ages now, they lied and manipulated the evidence about the strike on the cargo vessel as being from Iran, it was forgotten in a heartbeat and neither the US nor the Saudis managed to produce truthful evidence only lies and manipulation of facts. It took the japanese captain’s statements and the media that published it, to prevent a possible war because if it was up to the official statements from the US and the Saudis, by now Tehran would be burning.
Stupid to trust anything Mohammad “Bone Saw” bin Salman says.
I was wondering when the Saudi’s would hit a Yemeni industrial center with missiles. Maybe they’re well hidden.