What Should the Consequences Be?

Consider this article at the Washington Free Beacon which quotes an Iranian official as claiming that Iran facilitated the movements of the 9/11 terrorists:

Mohammad-Javad Larijani, an international affairs assistant in the Iran’s judiciary, disclosed in Farsi-language remarks broadcast on Iran’s state-controlled television that Iranian intelligence officials secretly helped provide the al Qaeda attackers with passage and gave them refuge in the Islamic Republic, according to an English translation published by Al Arabiya.

“Our government agreed not to stamp the passports of some of them because they were on transit flights for two hours, and they were resuming their flights without having their passports stamped. However their movements were under the complete supervision of the Iranian intelligence,” Larijani was quoted as saying.

The remarks represent the first time senior Iranian officials have publicly admitted to aiding al Qaeda and playing a direct role in facilitating the 9/11 attacks.

What should the consequences be?

  1. It’s impossible. Shi’ites will never cooperate with Sunnis.
  2. It’s not news. The U. S. government has maintained that all along. There have been consequences in the form of sanctions, etc. At least up until the “Iran deal”.
  3. This is part of a Gulf Arab-inspired propaganda and disinformation campaign.
  4. 17 years is a long time. We shouldn’t do anything.
  5. We should immediately invade Iran.
  6. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
  7. There should be consequences but not necessarily anything as direct or open as invasion or bombing.
3 comments… add one
  • PD Shaw

    B. Pretty sure this was specifically discussed in the 9/11 report.

  • Gustopher

    So, they were on a layover?

    Too much news is presented as “the amazing smoking gun that proves everything!” for partisan advantage that I have trouble knowing how to interpret things.

    From the above Larijani quote, this could be as simple as Iran was watching known bad actors, waiting to see what they were up to, as they passed through the country on a layover. Does Iran normally stamp the passports of people on a layover? Did they decide to make an exception to help the terrorists, or because they didn’t want to be associated with them? The quote makes me raise an eyebrow — it’s probably nothing, but worth looking into.

    But, I don’t see how the writer of the article then gets to his conclusions — and he is definitely not someone that I would trust to look into this.

    Also, it was covered in the 9/11 report. If there was deliberate Iranian involvement, we probably would have found it at the time, given how much we want to bomb Iran.

  • Ben Wolf

    D. The Iranian people are already battered by years of sanctions. There’s nothing else to do, particularly when the Saudis are completely off the hook.

Leave a Comment