Iran implicitly wards off suspicion over Fujairah sabotage


A senior Iranian lawmaker offered this suggestion on Monday: “The explosions of Fujairah port could have been carried out by saboteurs from a third country who seek instability in the region.” DEBKAfile: Neither Riyadh nor Abu Dhabi has named any party as responsible for Sunday’s sabotage attack in UAE waters, opposite the emirate of Fujairah, on four vessels, two of them Saudi oil tankers with a cargo for the US.. Aware that the finger may point at Tehran, the head of Iran parliament’s national security committee, Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, tried pointing it in another direction.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

11 thoughts on “Iran implicitly wards off suspicion over Fujairah sabotage

  • May 13, 2019 @ 19:06 at 19:06
    Permalink

    And the ayatollah of that very unknown country has his right hand crippled so badly, he must use only his left hand for all activities, including wipe with his fingers after going to the little corner, shaking hands, and rolling over the Quran pages?

    In this case, I really do not know! Oh, what to do, what to do?

    Reply
    • May 13, 2019 @ 20:51 at 20:51
      Permalink

      you left him alive? big mistake.

      Reply
  • May 13, 2019 @ 19:11 at 19:11
    Permalink

    Ok, it was the IRCG, so what?
    Losers will always have troubles to sell their oil.

    Reply
  • May 13, 2019 @ 20:06 at 20:06
    Permalink

    LIARS: the ayatollahs never uttered one word of truth – except the obliteration of the Jewish state !

    Reply
  • May 13, 2019 @ 20:07 at 20:07
    Permalink

    LIARS: the ayatollahs never uttered one word of truth – except the obliteration of the Jewish state !

    Reply
  • May 13, 2019 @ 20:47 at 20:47
    Permalink

    If your translation of what the “senior Iranian lawmaker” suggested is precise, then with this formulation Iran admitted to having been the culprit. You quoted him as saying: “could have been …” (“carried out by saboteurs from a third country.”) “Could” means that it is possible, whereas, if it was not Iran, then Iran itself would know with certainty that it was not them, and they would not formulate a third party as a possible culprit. Rather, in that case they would say: “It was (with certainty) carried out by a third country (since it was not us, which we know for sure) …”
    What has Iran accomplished? By introducing the “third country” hypothesis as a possibility, Iran itself is alerting the world to that other possibility that it could have just as well been Iran itself.
    If it was Iran, why not admit to it outright?
    Of course, due to expected repercussions, Iran does not want to admit with certainty that it was their doing.
    So, why admit to it at all, in the form of a possibility?
    It disturbs Iran that that “sabotage” it is not being attributed to them, since therefore the message that they were sending by blowing up the oil tankers is lost. So they raise a third country as a possibility, thus admitting Iran’s involvement as a possibility as well, instead of denying Iran’s involvement with certainty, or admitting it with certainty. Keep things vague, so that everyone knows who it was, without admitting to it outright.

    Reply
    • May 13, 2019 @ 20:54 at 20:54
      Permalink

      yes, unfortunately no jewish foreign minister for inexplicably confirming the narrative.

      Reply
    • May 13, 2019 @ 20:59 at 20:59
      Permalink

      “Iranian official admits that Iran could have carried out the sabotage of Saudi oil tankers” would be my preferred headline for this article.

      Reply
  • May 13, 2019 @ 22:23 at 22:23
    Permalink

    The ayatoolas were taking a break from murdering Persian men, women and children and gays, BaHais, Zoroastrians and Kurds.

    SMASH Fascist Iran!

    LONG LIVE PERSIA!

    Reply
  • May 14, 2019 @ 11:21 at 11:21
    Permalink

    Despite the pointing and counter pointing we’ll never know who did it unless intel is presented to prove it

    Reply
    • May 14, 2019 @ 15:09 at 15:09
      Permalink

      The motivation to stir up the region, raise the oil price and minimise retaliation by remaining anonymous alone speaks volumes, who else is likely?
      The precedent for anonymous nuclear attacks (which Iran must have after all these years of trying to do, something N Korea, Pakistan and India accomplished 23 yrs ago) is ominous.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Comments containing incitement, libel or offensive language are barred under DEBKAfile’s regulations

Your email address will not be published.

Font Resize
Contrast