You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
Police, FBI Plan To Examine Iran Links in JFK Plot
2007-06-05
As New York police and the FBI interview suspects in an alleged plot to attack John F. Kennedy International Airport, one thread the ongoing investigation will explore is why one of the suspects was planning to go to Iran. A former Guyanese legislator, Abdul Kadir, was arrested in Trinidad on Friday on a plane bound for Caracas, Venezuela. According to Mr. Kadir's wife, Isha Kadir, he was in the island nation to pick up an Iranian visa so he could attend an Islamic conference in Tehran. Two of Mr. Kadir's children are studying in Iran, according to Mrs. Kadir.

Trinidad's counterterrorism police are also investigating whether one of Mr. Kadir's alleged co-conspirators, a 56-year old Shiite imam in Trinidad named Kareem Ibrahim, had ties to Shiite organizations in southern Iraq and Iran through an Islamic discussion group he hosted, according to the Trinidad Express.

In interviews in the Guyanese press, Mrs. Kadir said her husband's Iran connection was likely the reason the FBI was requesting his extradition. "We are shocked, we are not part of these things," she was quoted by Kaieteur News in Guyana. "To begin with, we are not Al Qaeda ... we are Shia. My husband is a decent, devoted, intelligent Muslim. Both of us have relatives in the United States. It would be nonsensical for him to plot something like this."

An FBI spokesman in New York would not comment on the fact that Mr. Kadir was on his way to Iran when he was arrested, noting only that the investigation into the plot against New York's largest airport was ongoing. However, a law enforcement official who requested anonymity said the Iran connection was a lead the investigators would be following.

If Iran's hand is found behind the JFK airport plot, it would raise an alarm about the Islamic Republic's recent alliances with America's hemispheric enemies. Since the 2005 ascendance of President Ahmadinejad in Iran, the Iranian regime has strengthened ties with such leaders as President Castro of Cuba, President Chavez of Venezuela, and even President Reagan's one-time foe, President Ortega of Nicaragua.

Mr. Chavez, for example, has signed a series of cooperation agreements with Iran and allowed Iranian television producers to consult on Venezuela's plan to offer a Spanish-language satellite television station. The Venezuelans have also allowed the Lebanese group Hezbollah, which receives funds and guidance from Tehran, to operate openly in their country.

A former FBI officer who until 2003 was in charge of the counterterrorism unit that monitored Iran and Hezbollah, Kenneth Piernick, said yesterday that he would not be surprised if the plotters had a connection to the Iranian regime. "The fact of the matter is that the Iranians are a bunch of sneaky bastards. They are going to take care of anyone who hurts us. I am not at all surprised that they might have been trying to provide him cover to get out of the region," he said in a telephone interview.

While the New York police commissioner, Raymond Kelly, stressed Saturday that as far as he knew, the plot was not connected to Al Qaeda, the indictment says the plotters sought assistance from the Guyanese Islamist group known as Jaamat al Muslimeen, or the Muslim Group. In 1990, 100 members of Jaamat al Muslimeen attempted a coup in Guyana that resulted in widespread riots. The leader of the group is expected to face trial this month in Guyana's capital, Georgetown.

According to an analyst at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington, D.C., Chris Zambelis, Jaamat al Muslimeen has never focused on international operations and was restricted primarily to organized crime. The organization also preaches a strict Sunni doctrine, wile Mr. Kadir is a Shiite, a branch of Islam that fundamentalist Sunnis regard as heretic.

Mr. Piernick said it was not wise to make too much of the differences between the Muslim branches when it came to Iran's role in supporting anti-American terror. "Shia Hezbollah has trained Sunnis in military operations without concern for their sect in Islam. What is of concern is that they are able to engage in terrorist acts," he said. " Al Qaeda has found sanctuary in Iran. Is this guy in a payroll? I don't know. Are they willing to help him out, a fellow Muslim against the ‘Great Satan'? Yes, I think they would."
Posted by:Fred

#18  Islam is begging for destruction. Why should we not oblige? We're fools not to.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 23:59  

#17  And I believe in fighting the war because I don't want to become part of yet another goddamned-to-HELL hydraulic empire that maintains its power by setting tribe against tribe.

Your style of fighting the war, I'm afraid, would bring us there.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 23:59  

#16  I'm not sure I have any. I just don't see selling our soul to whatever Hitler or Stalin promises deliverance as a realistic solution in and of itself.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 23:58  

#15  No, I just see a need for realistic solutions. Do you have any?
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 23:55  

#14  So you think everyone who disagrees with you about how to fight the war is a naive optimist?
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 23:53  

#13  What do you foresee as a solution, AS? I'm truly curious. None of the experts are very hopeful. Whay are you?
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 23:36  

#12  Yet you cheerfully avoid recognizing the fact that there is no reaching of any sort of accommodation with Islam.

That's argumentation by assertion. I don't "avoid recognizing" your conclusion, I disagree with it.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 22:27  

#11  If Iran's hand is found behind the JFK airport plot, it would raise an alarm about the Islamic Republic's recent alliances with America's hemispheric enemies. Since the 2005 ascendance of President Ahmadinejad in Iran, the Iranian regime has strengthened ties with such leaders as President Castro of Cuba, President Chavez of Venezuela, and even President Reagan's one-time foe, President Ortega of Nicaragua.

If Iran is involved, it also puts them in league with AQ. Paul L. Williams book The Day of Islam puts AQ cells throughout South America,(Colombia, Peru, Brazil, Paraguay, Ecuador, Argentina, Venezuela) with Muslim extremist enclaves of 1500 Arabs overseeing poppy production as they did in Afghanistan. He claims Iranian geologists and scientists are there since 2005 extracting uranium.Then he tells of MI5 covertly intercepting AQ weapons smugglers exchanging cocaine for surface-to-air missiles on fisshing boats off the coast of Venezuela. Then there is the Latin American and Caribbean connection, with Hezbollah,Jemaah Islamiyah, and the Chechen Mafia (supposedly at Bin Laden's invite) setting up shop in Surinam, Trinidad/Tobago, Guyana. Moving on the JFK plot was really a stroke of luck, and may have be the next great lead. This book is a must read as most intelligence concentrates on Pakistan and the rest of the ME exclusively and ignores their willingness to work together against their hated American enemies.
Posted by: Danielle   2007-06-05 22:25  

#10  Yet you cheerfully avoid recognizing the fact that there is no reaching of any sort of accommodation with Islam. There is nothing to negotiate. Any delay is merely more time for them to summon resources to be used against us. Do you honestly think that it is possible to coexist with Islam? Go ahead and talk all you want about reform. Most experts on the topic do not foresee any sort of reform in Islam's future. Ijtihad has been dead for about a thousand years. I hold ZERO hope of Islam modifying itself. Indeed, the vast majority of Muslim clerics prohibit even the discussion of it. So, where does that leave us?
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 22:18  

#9  Ah, yes, the little girl that was stoned to death.

Ya know, she wasn't stoned to death by moslems, but by Yezedis.

Lots of moslems used that stoning as an excuse to perform lynchings of yezedis in the aftermath, did you know that? Using the same sort of logic you're using now. "The religion's a source of evil." "They didn't explicitly disavow the stoning, therefore they must be guilty." Basically, it's not really about religion to them, it's just about tribal affiliation. And a control mechanism.

You want us to adopt the exact same tribalistic behavior that's causing all the problems over there to begin with.

And if all Iraqis were like you describe, I can assure you, we wouldn't be occupying the country with a measly 100,000 troops, and pretending 130,000 were a meaningful "surge."
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 21:54  

#8  No 15 paragraphs needed, Pappy. This one's easier than most.

Haven't been paying very close attention, have you, AS? If you have bothered to read any of my posts lately, you'd know that I always put Iran, Pakistan and Saudia Arabia at the top of our Christmas list. If there're Kurds that need killing, it's the PKK or Ansar al Islam variety, but you couldn't be bothered to note that. Remember, even your precious Iraqi Kurds stone people to death. Is that who you want to share your world with?

Just in case you haven't noticed, Islam is our enemy. The Koran's doctrine preaches violence, rape, theft and forcible subjugation for all of us Infidels. I'll ask you to note how those Muslims we get along with best are often Shiite or Kurdish (as in Iraq). See if you can remember how our enemies the Sunnis have essentially declared both of them heretics or apostate for their deviation from fundamentalist Sunni doctrine. I could go on to point out how that makes them something other than Muslims, but I'm not going to split hairs like you are willing to.

So long as individuals follow the Koran, they are our enemy. The Koran explicitly exhorts its followers to establish a global caliphate based upon shari'a law. Those who do not adhere to this dogma are blasphemers, heretics or apostates. They are also so few in number as to be negligible in terms of rectifying the situation on their own part or affecting the greater arc of our military strategy. If that isn't enough to motivate some strong military opposition in you, then you may be in the wrong camp.

The KORAN, and that means the world's MUSLIM population because they follow the Koran, wants to destroy America and every other vestige of democracy on earth. Let me know if there's anything unclear about that. In case you haven't noticed, Islam is doing all of jack shit when it comes to combating the jihadists in their midst. They sit back and laugh while we stupidly try to do the foolishly impossible task of cleaning house for them. If Islam refuses to clean up its act, then we should not be bothered with making very many fine distinctions about the Muslim population in general. They are the ones who must begin differentiating themselves. Should they refuse to do so, they become the enemy. So far, the vast majority of Muslims have done nothing but make themselves the enemy of America.

You cite Afghanistan, a signatory to the human rights doctrine, who nonetheless backpedaled completely in the case of Abdul Rahman, a convert to Christianity. I'm sure you remember how they wanted to BEHEAD this guy. Instead, they ended up copping out by declaring him insane rather than apostate like they wanted to, despite agreeing to freedom of religion. Get a clue, we liberated these thankless shits just so they can continue to enforce Islamic monoculture when they explicitly agreed to institute freedom of religion. Just how valuable are "friends" of that sort?

The same goes for Iraq. We liberated these thankless shits only to have their population kick back and give the terrorists largely free reign. Yes, they went after al Qaeda, but only because bin Laden's thugs were making the lives of the terrorist factions even more miserable than they did for each other. So, if you have no problem accommodating the existence of these duplicitous backstabbing ingrates, go right ahead.

I happen to have had enough of this shit and look forward to the day that Islam is a historical footnote. Perhaps then our world can once again make progress instead of having to spend untold TRILLIONS of dollars fighting a bunch of psychotic killers.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 21:17  

#7  Don't confuse him, AS. We'll just be subjected to another 15-paragraph cut-n-paste dissurtayshun.
Posted by: Pappy   2007-06-05 20:58  

#6  The next time there is a 911, our response is going to be very very ugly and widespread.

We'll roll over so fast we'll crush small animals.
Posted by: Rob Crawford   2007-06-05 20:14  

#5  Ya wanna start with the Peshmerga, or the Afghan or Iraqi armies we just built, Zenster?
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2007-06-05 18:43  

#4  Agreed, JohnQC:

Mr. Piernick said it was not wise to make too much of the differences between the Muslim branches when it came to Iran's role in supporting anti-American terror. "Shia Hezbollah has trained Sunnis in military operations without concern for their sect in Islam. What is of concern is that they are able to engage in terrorist acts," he said. " Al Qaeda has found sanctuary in Iran. Is this guy in a payroll? I don't know. Are they willing to help him out, a fellow Muslim against the ‘Great Satan'? Yes, I think they would."

So much for this bullshit about how Islam is not monolithic. As the Global War on Terror heats up, one constant has been the increasing willingness of Sunnis and Shiites to assist each other in terrorist funding and operations.

This is a major reason why I have shifted over to supporting collective punishment against Muslims. Far too much of their anti-American Islamic crapulence features as a universal constant throughout their population for us to have any further patience with it.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 17:07  

#3  A former FBI officer who until 2003 was in charge of the counterterrorism unit that monitored Iran and Hezbollah, Kenneth Piernick, said yesterday that he would not be surprised if the plotters had a connection to the Iranian regime. "The fact of the matter is that the Iranians are a bunch of sneaky bastards. They are going to take care of anyone who hurts us. I am not at all surprised that they might have been trying to provide him cover to get out of the region," he said in a telephone interview.

Piernick seems to have a handle on this. Iranians are a sneaky bunch of bastards.
Posted by: JohnQC   2007-06-05 16:57  

#2  What is it going to take? Is Bush going to have to catch Ahmadinejad en flagrante porking his wife before he does something about Iran? The Iranians have been killing Americans with impunity for so many decades that we would not be out of line to glass them over just for grins.
Posted by: Zenster   2007-06-05 16:26  

#1  ...one thread the ongoing investigation will explore is why one of the suspects was planning to go to Iran.

Either the guy going to Iran was trying to get money or technical support or both. Would not surprise me if Iran would be interested in such a plot. However, they would be very stupid to run the risk of having any blowback on them. The next time there is a 911, our response is going to be very very ugly and widespread.
Posted by: JohnQC   2007-06-05 16:23  

00:00