## Verified facts
The supplied report says Salam Ahmadyan, 36, of Liverpool, and Rahman Salehi, 34, of Salford, were arrested in Manchester on Sunday, September 20, and charged on Friday with engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts under Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006. They have been remanded in custody and are due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.
According to Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP), the allegations include receiving instructions to make a chlorine bomb; acquiring liquids, components and equipment for an improvised explosive device; researching potential targets online; obtaining images, plans and maps; and conducting reconnaissance. CTP also said the men were allegedly in contact with an overseas third party who may be in Iran. Searches were conducted at addresses in Liverpool and Salford.
The report says the men arrived in the UK by small boat in 2020 and 2023. One was granted asylum and the other has a live asylum claim. These immigration details are reported as background and do not, by themselves, establish involvement in the alleged plot.
CTP said it believes the investigation disrupted a plot targeting the Jewish community in Manchester and that there is no ongoing public threat in relation to this matter. Police said the case coincided with Yom Kippur, the anniversary of last year’s attack at Heaton Park Synagogue, and heightened concern about antisemitism. CTP explicitly said this investigation is not connected to the investigation into the RAF Fairford incident.
## Interpretation
The charges indicate that prosecutors allege preparatory activity rather than a completed attack. The reported acquisition of materials, target research and reconnaissance, if established in court, would suggest an alleged plot that had progressed beyond a purely exploratory stage. This is an interpretation of the allegations, not a finding of fact.
The timing of the arrests and the identified target community help explain why police and political leaders described the case as especially sensitive. However, the timing does not establish a motive or prove that the alleged activity was intended to produce an attack during the Jewish High Holy Days.
The Home Secretary referred to threats from the Iranian regime and said there were indications of Iran’s involvement in events near RAF Fairford. The supplied evidence does not establish that the Iranian government directed or supported the Manchester allegations. CTP’s statement that the two investigations are unrelated is the relevant qualification in the evidence.
## Uncertainty and legal status
The men have been charged, not convicted. The allegations remain to be tested in court, and both defendants have the right to a fair trial. The evidence does not include their responses to the charges, details of the prosecution evidence, or confirmation of the identity or role of the alleged overseas third party.
The supplied report says the third party may be in Iran; it does not establish that the person is linked to the Iranian state. It also does not specify which potential locations were allegedly reconnoitred or provide independent confirmation of the alleged bomb-making instructions or materials.
The evidence supports reporting this as an alleged plot disrupted by Counter Terrorism Policing, while avoiding claims that an attack was imminent, that the defendants were acting on behalf of Iran, or that the allegations will ultimately be proved.
