Michele Bachmann's ding-dong moment redux

Having already pointed out that Michele Bachman is a ding-dong, further evidence of her basic cluelessness is her commentary on the Iranian protesters government seizure of the English British embassy.

ABC News reports,

In light of the British Foreign Ministry pulling all U.K. nationals out of the British embassy in Tehran after students stormed the building in protest, GOP presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann told a crowd in Waverly, Iowa, today that she would close the U.S. embassy in Iran.

One small, tiny note: The U.S. hasn’t had an embassy in Tehran since 1980. Following the Iranian Hostage Crisis, where 52 Americans were held for 444 days, the United States cut all diplomatic ties.

According to reports, Bachmann applauded the U.K.’s move, adding, “That’s exactly what I would do [if I were president]. We wouldn’t have an embassy in Iran. I wouldn’t allow that to be there.”

The campaign tried to backtrack today, but it ain't selling. You can bet, though, that this is being much more widely reported than President Obama condemning Tuesday the takeover of the "English embassy" in Iran. Well, just as there is no American embassy in the country, neither is there an English embassy there - or anywhere else in the world. The embassy is the British embassy, encompassing more than only England.

Huge Explosion In Iran's Nuke City

Huge Explosion In IRAN's Nuke City:

Less than two weeks after a mysterious explosion destroyed an Iranian missile development base, and the same day the Israeli Military reported on the effect of that explosion, Iran's official news agency FARS reported that a loud blast was heard in the city of Isfahan at 2:40 pm local time (6:10am EST).

Iran operates a uranium conversion plant near Isfahan, which has a major role in the nuclear weapons process. first went into operation in 2004, taking uranium from mines and producing uranium fluoride gas, which then feeds the centrifuges that enrich the uranium.

Since 2004 (thank you France) , thousands of tons of uranium flouride gas were stockpiled at Isfahan and subsequently sent to the enrichment plant in Natanz. Search and rescue teams called to the scene confirmed the blast, but as of yet no injuries have been reported.

Iran's uranium enrichment plant is located just outside the city of Isfahan – one of Iran's largest cities.

According to the FARS report, a security official confirmed that the explosion had occurred, but refused to give further details.

Which makes these two pieces all the more relevant:

Why the Israeli Air Force will bomb Iran this spring

Why the strikes are likely to succeed

Is Iran really this stupid? Iran Plot Questions Mounting

Mounting Questions on Iran Terror Plot:

Soon after Attorney General Eric Holder announced the arrest of Iranian-American Manssor Arbabsiar in connection with an alleged Iran-directed plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States, administration officials had harsh words for Iran, but many experts voiced skepticism (NYT). Kenneth Katzman, an Iran expert at the Congressional Research Service, says he and many of his peers believe that elements of the plan--such as the alleged intent to use a Mexican drug cartel to carry out the killing--simply don't comport with what they know "about the way Iranians conduct terrorist attacks" and "the way they implement them." Katzman also notes that the attack, if it had succeeded, would have drawn a strong retaliatory U.S. response, which is something Iran "does not want."

Katzman's observations may be summed up thusly:

1. "The main element that falls apart dramatically is that the assassination of the Saudi ambassador in Washington was supposed to be carried out by Mexican drug cartel members. Iran has never used surrogates with whom they are unfamiliar. Non-Muslim proxy groups are never used."

2. "The second element that doesn't add up is the plot's origination with this Texas car salesman of Iranian origin. The Iranians almost always use active members of the Quds Force, or Iranian surrogate organizations. They do not go to ex-members or retired members, or relatives of members to carry out dedicated and organized plots."

3. "The third aspect is that this plot might have involved a fairly sizable bombing that could very well have killed a number of people in Washington. The Iranian regime would have known that had it happened, it would have triggered calls for immediate military action against Iran."

3. That the plot's ttarget was the Saudi ambassador to the United States: "That aspect of the alleged plot is actually the one that is most logical. Not specifically that they would go after Ambassador Adel Al Jubeir, but that they would be going after the Saudi regime and Saudi high officials. There's clearly strategic competition, or worse, between these two nations, so [for Iran to be] trying to hurt the Saudis is something that makes sense to us as experts."

But:

I can't comment on the administration's response, but I can say that certainly with more study and more analysis they may ultimately either walk back some of what they've said or soften it, or in some ways just simply drop it. The questions I have outlined are themes being put forward by other experts who know about Iranian terrorism and really know how Iran acts and operates. ...

My peers [and I] are all sort of shaking our heads saying: This just doesn't add up to what we know about Iranian terrorism, and we think we know Iranian terrorism because we've been writing on it and watching it for a very long time.

Reuters adds:

But many outside experts, and at least some officials inside the government, remain wary, with some expressing concern that the administration of President Barack Obama is inflating the significance of a questionable plot to score political and diplomatic points against Tehran.

A former U.S. intelligence official said it was unlikely that FBI Director Robert Mueller and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would publicly tout the alleged Iranian government angle if they had qualms about the intelligence.

"There are too many people who are defending it to think it's totally bogus," a former intelligence official said.

But the official added: "I'm having a real hard time believing it is as orchestrated and centrally run as they seem to be implying. If it weren't for the fact that there were so many people standing up and publicly talking about it who ought to know, then I would be even more skeptical."