I was traveling yesterday and didn’t get caught up on the news until last night. A few thoughts.
1. Trumped up case? There are conspiracy theories floating around claiming that this bizarre plot — the Iranians recruit a Mexican drug cartel guy who just happened to be a DEA informant to rub out the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. — was probably cooked up by the Justice Department to deflect attention from the Fast & Furious debacle. No way.
To be sure, Attorney General Holder has only himself to blame: under his stewardship, law enforcement has been thoroughly politicized, and when you run the ship that way people are apt to be suspicious of your every move. But this Iran case is not being run by Main Justice — and I don’t mean to cast aspersions at Main Justice, where many fine people work; I’m simply pointing out that if you were an AG trying to pull off a scam, you’d keep it close to home with as few people in the know as possible. The case is being handled by my old office (the Southern District of New York), where the U.S. attorney is a very honorable guy and the prosecutors are notoriously resistant to micro-management by Main Justice. The FBI director is also a straight arrow, as are the vast, vast majority of agents. There are just too many people involved — good, hardworking people, who would take no part in a charade designed to take the heat off the AG.
Two other points on this subject: (a) If you were of a mind to trump up a spectacular case, you could gin up something without involving international relations, the potential of provoking a war, and the involvement of top government officials who don’t have much incentive to go out on a limb for Eric Holder (i.e., the Justice Department does not have its usual free reign when a prosecution implicates the responsibilities of other agencies); and (b) the attorney general knows that Fast & Furious is not going away, so it would be pointless to try to make it go away with a case that will only get a few days’ attention before fading from our notice.
2. Stranger things have happened. Would the Iranians turn to Mexican narco-gangs to kill Saudis in America? The Iranians have shown that they will work with anyone if it means working against American interests. Al Qaeda is a Sunni terrorist organization that is not overly fond of Shiite Muslims. The Taliban was Iran’s nemesis when it was running Afghanistan. Yet, the Iranians have colluded with al Qaeda and armed the Taliban for what they see as the greater good of making trouble for us.
Remember, too, it was only a few years ago that Qaddafi tried to rub out then-crown prince (now king) Abdullah by retaining the services of Abdurrahman Alamoudi — an American-based, well-connected financier of terrorist organizations. The current plot can’t be dismissed out of hand just because the scenario is bizarre. Once you get past the ostensible weirdness of the plot and dig into the details, you learn that the Iranian-American who tried to recruit Mexican assassins actually is related to a Quds operative; he apparently received a down-payment from an IRGC-Quds bank account (i.e., this was not an imaginary $1.5 million scheme); he spoke with Iranian officials on the phone (in calls the FBI monitored); and he correctly identified a known Quds operative from a photo-spread. Again, given the international ramifications, I can’t imagine the Justice Department and the FBI going forward here absent confidence that the case is solid.
3. Iran’s brazenness. It is surprising to hear suggestions that Iran has suddenly crossed a line by — allegedly — plotting to kill a Saudi diplomat on U.S. soil. As Iranian provocations go, this one is pretty tame. I related the history here a couple of years ago, and the best accounting is found in Michael Ledeen’s books — most recently, Accomplice to Evil. To highlight just a few things: Iran killed 19 members of our air force at Khobar Towers in 1996; it has had a working relationship with al Qaeda since the early nineties; it was likely complicit in the 9/11 attacks (a matter the 9/11 Commission strongly suggested — but on which neither the Commission nor anyone else in government followed up); and Iran has been plotting against and killing American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq for a decade. Compared to that rich record of direct attacks against Americans, the current plot is no more than par for the course.
4. The Holy Grail. Regardless of how atrocious Iran’s behavior gets, the State Department for 30 years — under administration’s of both parties — has continued to tell itself, and us, that the grand bargain with the mullahs is right around the corner. We’re already seeing that dynamic at work again. Attorney General Holder asserted that the murder plot was “directed and approved by elements of the Iranian government and, specifically, senior members of the Quds Force,” and that “high-up officials in those agencies, which is an integral part of the Iranian government, were responsible for this plot.” But, as night follows day, the State Department and other administration officials are out throwing cold water on these claims with their usual tap dance: Iran is very complicated; the IRGC is like a government within a government; there are various rogue elements, so this was probably a rogue operation; just because somebody in the Iranian government may have been complicit does not mean muckety-mucks like Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei were involved; diplo-blah, blah, blah. It looks like we will keep chasing the Holy Grail — rationalizing inaction in the face of ever-mounting provocations while we keep searching for “moderates” embedded somewhere in the regime who will somehow maneuver Iran into a new era of good relations with the Great Satan. Continued good luck with that.
Here come's Obama's October surprise - but this administration is so incompetent that it is launching it in the wrong year!!! They must be VERY desparate...
Desperate enough to push the jobs bill defeat off the front pages.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't think it's 'trumped up' Mr. McCarthy. (When F&F relates to drug cartels, why make up a plot involving the very thing you're trying to hide from?) I do wonder about the timing. Is this meant to take the public's eye from something else?
Plus, the administration has said that an armed response is off the table. Um... Why declare anything off the table?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOn timing, while I'm not in a position to know this, I suspect what happened is: the government convinced the guy at the center of the plot to confess and cooperate, by making monitored phone calls and reaching out to Iranian officials in other ways to corroborate Iran's involvement. That appears to have happened at the end of September. You can only go on with that for so long, because (a) an arrested suspect generally has to be brought to court and advised of the charges within a few hours -- a right that can be waived, but not forever; and (b) conspirators don't like to speak on the phone because they know the investigators may be listening in; when one guy starts using the phone a lot, or asking a lot of unnecessary questions, the others start to suspect he's been flipped and is gathering evidence for the government, so you can only carry on that aspect of an investigation for so long. I imagine they played it out for a few days, and when they thought they had enough evidence to prove the Iranian connection, they shut down that part of the investigation so they could get the arrested plotter to court and move ahead with the prosecution phase. That's a long-winded way of saying I believe the timing was driven by ordinary investigative rhythms, not anything more sinister.
On retaliation, I couldn't agree more. I don't know why we ever take the military option off the table with Iran. That doesn't mean you have to attack, but why give a comfort level to your enemies?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWow, Andrew McCarthy replied to me, my nerd cred just went up ;-)
I understand what you're saying with the limited window. It is just hard sometimes to *not* ascribe political motives to whatever this administration does.
It is good on the forces that stopped this, even if they are treating foriegn nationals like they have full rights of Americans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"On timing, while I'm not in a position to know this, I suspect what happened is"
That is very week gruel. Most lawyers would laugh at that. Certainly a judge would.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat could possibly contain Iran? The next time that there is a hint that they've been involved in an attack on US interests, we send a cruise missile to Qom. (As the mealy-mouthed effeminate media would put it, the "holy city of Qom"). Another attack? Mecca. The next? Medina. And so on...
The eastern world respects (maybe not likes) strength. Obama / the US is W-E-A-K in their eyes. We know how much they value and respect women; we've had two consecutive female SecStates! To them, we're so effete Obama should be carrying a purse. (Maybe he does; "it's European!")
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm no fan of Iran, but is there anything but the (to me) unsubstantiated claims of the suspect that support the allegation that Iran is behind this?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWith respect to your "Holy Grail" section, particularly as it relates to the Administration's explanation/defense/apologist position, I would say that the Administration's position isn't comforting.
If these "rogue elements" actually exist in the Iranian government, what's to keep these same elements from proliferating nuclear technology, or even deploying a nuclear device, all under the unsuspecting noses of Ahmadinejad et. al? Upon closer examination, the rogue elements apology by the administration isn't much of a defense or apology at all. In fact, it's perhaps even more frightening.
OTOH, it might be an encouraging sign that the Iranians still have to farm out their wet work. And, it might also be a good sign that they chose to work with a group of people that are so ridiculously incompetent, untrained and unprofessional that it could be an action-comedy, if it was written by a Hollywood screen-writer.
When the Iranians start successfully recruiting from the former Soviet Block countries, then we'll have bigger problems.
On the other, other had - maybe there's an even deeper Machiavellian twist being attempted by the Iranians: If the Mexican drug cartels start assassinating Americans, or foreign diplomats on American soil, that might force us to pay more attention to the failed state on our southern border. If that happens, we would then pay less attention to the Middle East.
The Iranians aren't that smart, are they?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Iranian government is not stupid enough to orchestrate a stupid plan to use unknown Mexican drug cartel members to do this. They would easily be implicated, if the plan ever came off.
The Iranian government is many things, but stupid is not one of them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour assumption is that Iran thought it had much to lose if the plot was exposed.
I suspect they did not think they had much, if anything, to lose. They have taken the measure of Obama and they have dismissed him.
If the plot had succeeded the blame may have gone to al Qaeda, as revenge for the killing of OBL. I doubt al Qaeda would mind claiming, taking, and getting credit.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo let me get this straight. Iran would hire Mexican drug cartel members to kill the Saudi and possibly Israeli ambassador in Washington DC and make it look as if it was Al Qaeda getting revenge for the United States entering Pakistan and killing Osama bin Laden?
Ha ha ha oh oh oh OK.
I'll give Peter King credit though. He said something like it would be impossible for high level people in the Iranian government not to know about such a plot. I agree. Only problem, the plot is preposterous.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs the Iranian delegation to the UN in play here? Can we expell some folks in response to this?
Taking the military option away is par for the course with westerners for as long as I can remember. I was very unhappy with the way the Bush admin handled Iran during the height of the war. The opportunity to destroy some of their training facilities was obvious and the graduates of those facilities were killing our guys and Iraqis. But we did virtually nothing.
My view of Iran is this: the regime is like a well armed and dangerous brat. A brat will constantly test limits to see what they can get away with. Iran is doing the same thing. If our response is a strongly worded letter from Hillary, they've won another round.
And I wish to take this opportunity to point out one of the lessons America taught the mullahs. Saddam Hussein actively plotted to kill Bush the elder. yet we debated the propriety of taking him down even as we were doing so.
The mullahs know that there is a significant portion of the American people that simply doesn't believe in strength. so they will test the limits knowing that the response will be tempered by folks like the ones occupying wall street.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFormer Secretary Chertoff was just on Fox and mentioned that the Zetas were "possible allies" of the Iranians in this. I support the use of the adjective "possible." Yet "allies" still seems a bit strong. Perhaps he should just accept the Zetas as "service providers" or "contractors." In any case, he should reevaluate his position re: the southern border of the United States.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis plot sounds like an episode of America's dumbest criminals. An American citizen of Iranian descent enlists the Mexican Cartel to murder a Saudi ambassador--possibly by blowing up the ambassador at his favorite restaurant along with everyone there--but his connection to the Cartel is a DEA informant. How many DEA informants are there in the Cartel? What are the odds that the one guy this terrorist enlists in his plot is in the employment of the DEA?
It makes you doubt the competence of the Iranians. While Putin's Russia is able to assassinate people in Western countries by dosing their coffee with radioactive isotopes (very subtle and effective, IMHO), displaying the core competencies of the old KGB, the Iranians can't even get their plot into the planning stage without being discovered.
I suppose we should be grateful that this wasn't another Fast and Furious idea by the Justice Department to establish connections between the cartels and Middle Eastern terrorism. And we know that it wasn't because the government stepped in before anyone got killed, for a change.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI wonder if the CIA knew about this...usually international espionage and terrorism cases like this fall into their realm...perhaps they still are working some aspects of this and thus remain quiet...is it possible though there is some interagency dogfighting going on here and FBI has kept CIA out of the loop...I hope not.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe phony 'Iran Plot' story is a distraction from fbi incompetence and at the same time prepares the world for an attack on Iran by USA or '?Isreal'
External Link
External Link
External Link
A nation and its people who deliberately engage in the systematic conquest, subjugation, torture, imprisonment and killing of others must by the laws of physics and divine nature have the same calamities delivered upon themselves.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFirst he claims the plot is a distraction, then he claims that it is justified.
"A nation and its people who deliberately engage in the systematic conquest, subjugation, torture, imprisonment and killing of others"
Sounds more like Iran to me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCharles Krauthammer, with his usual sagacity, brought up an interesting point last night on Fox. He said that a side benefit to Iran if this operation was successful would be that it would tell the Great Satan that Iran can detonate a bomb right into the heart of DC. The further implication being that perhaps a suitcase nuke is possible once Iran perfects that technology. This would in theory hold the Great Satan at bay for fear of attack and permit Iran to continue the revolution in the Middle East and elsewhere without much fear of the US doing anything about it.
I wonder though if this was too bold a move by the mullahs. I can conceivably see a joint US/Saudi/Israeli operation to inflict some serious damage on Iran. At least at some point after Obama is out of office (would Obama attack Iran though if he thought that was the only way he could get re-elected??).
I'm starting to think that simply killing the mullahs and A'jad is the least bad option we have (if it's even possible). I know that there would be serious ramifications for such a brazen assassination. However, it may prevent a far worse situation. It also may have some pretty appealing benefits. Other states with nuclear ambitions would surely take notice. I know, this all sounds crazy. But can we expect the citizens of Iran to overthrow the mullahs in time? Are we willing to live with a nuked up religiously fanatic regime that believes in the return of the 12th Imam? Awfully awfully risky if you ask me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"I'm starting to think that simply killing the mullahs and A'jad is the least bad option we have (if it's even possible). I know that there would be serious ramifications for such a brazen assassination."
We just had a Predator drop a bomb on a US citizen that was inciting terrorism while residing in a foreign country. What would be so brazen about dropping a bomb on the leadership of a country that has been providing material support/training for terrorists for 30-years? The last 10-years in Iraq and their "sponsorship" of the ied usage is just the latest chapter in Iran's connection to terror. I would suggest that killing Awlaki (sp.) was a much bigger deal then killing Iran's leadership.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI can't put my finger on what it is but this plot smells. Sounds like a few guys got together and decided to put on a show.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse