You mean we can try terrorists in court?

Here’s the problem with sporadic adherence to the rule of a law and an opaque extra-judicial legal system: We just don’t know who or what to believe. (That, and the executions.) The timing on this Iran “terror” plot is a little too convenient, isn’t it? I guess we should be grateful the terrorists — excuse me, alleged terrorists – weren’t simply sent to Gitmo. Amy Davidson in the New Yorker:

It’s hard to know, at this stage, how solid the case against two men charged with trying to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the United States is. But it does have one thing to recommend it: an indictment. One of the men charged, Manssor Arbabsiar, an American citizen, was arrested at J.F.K. on September 29th. (The other, Gholam Shakuri, an Iranian, is at large, but, according to Eric Holder, the Attorney General, is not believed to be in the United States.) Arbabsiar will be put on trial in a court in lower Manhattan, just as Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be “Christmas Bomber,” went on trial today in a court in Detroit. Neither was sent to Guantánamo, or put before a military tribunal, or preëmptively assassinated. That sounds like a simple thing, and it should be, and can be, even when, as in this new case, the alleged crime is complex. There is something discouraging about the relief one feels at a rudimentary adherence to the rule of law.

At least six countries are part of the story: allegedly, an American who also had an Iranian passport travelled to Mexico to meet with a member of a drug cartel (who turned out to be a confidential D.E.A. informant) to recruit a hitman to kill a Saudi Arabian and maybe also attack the Israeli embassy in Argentina. (A map with pins in it would help here.) And its scale was also potentially great: according to a wiretap recording cited in the indictment, which said, “They want that guy [the Ambassador] done [killed], if the hundred go with him, f*ck ’em.” Still: that is nothing our justice system—our real one—can’t handle, when we let it. The evidence against Arbabsiar, according to the indictment, includes “a series of Mirandized interviews” in which he “confessed to his participation in the plot” and also gave information about the involvement of others.

10 thoughts on “You mean we can try terrorists in court?

  1. This entire episode is a joke and a fabrication. But that’s not the important part. What it’s meant to convey to external third parties is what this exercise is all about. On any normal day we would all be talking about the fact that Hamas released the Israeli Shalit (with the help of Egypt whose leadership, the army, is in freefall), while Israel released over 1000 prisoners being held in their jails back to Hamas. That simple act put Ahmadinejad and his Quds group on notice that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was about to take all of them “out.” There is more to this story if you’d like it told?

  2. My first reaction on hearing the news of the Iranian “terra” “plot” was that Obama et al is once more acting just like the Bush/Cheney crew. If opposition is growing or polls falling, trot out a new terra plot.

    But my second thought was that this seems to indicate Obama is moving toward military action, war, against Iran.

    The first is laughable and lamentable; the second is damn scary.

    I noted that Richard Clarke interviewed on NPR last night carefully added “if this is true” and “alleged” to his discussion of the “plot.”

    Is there any terra plot intended for US soil that was not enabled or incited by a gov’t informer?? What comes to mind is the Millennial bomber who was caught by an observant customs/border agent who thought the driver seemed very nervous…iirc.

    But this? How does the administration back away or down from this accusation without looking either incompetent or weak? And how do they go forward, other than to use tactics which can lead to war?

    If Obama is truly extending and cementing Bush policies, this foundation for aggression against Iran will lead to war. That’s how Bush/Cheney rolled — and Obama seems to be going downhill just as they did.

  3. That was my first thought: how conveeenient. The one Iranian contacts a Mexican drug enforcer to do murder for hire. In a country awash in cartel-linked killers, he manages to land on a US informant. Just like that. First crack out of the box.

    Then, when he’s arrested, he cooperatively implicates his entire chain of command. That’s not impossible. If you’re hoping for leniency, I could see somebody doing that. But it’s also very convenient.

    And then, the timing is convenient for inflating poll numbers.

    As you say, one of the many things that stink about this is that without the rule of law, anything could be true.

  4. jawbone/Imhotep: we all must be ‘telepin’ because I swear all this crap reminds me of how the previous administration seemed to use the ‘politics of fear’ to raise the polls whenever the electorate began to relax. I have no doubt that Obama has a few more tricks up his sleeve yet to be revealed.

    (As an aside, what if Hillary changed places on the ticket with Biden for ’12?)

  5. First, it must be said that without the OWS movement none of what is happening related to this “plot” would, or could, have taken place. Hamas (a creation of Israel) and Hezbollah (heavily infiltrated by Israel) are ascendant. (Israel really hates the PLO and Abu Mazen.) In addition the Wahhabists, who control Saudi Arabian foreign and domestic policy and from whom bin Laden and his hijackers came, were put on notice yesterday that the “end is near.” The Syrian oligarchy (dictatorship) which is supported in lots of ways by Ahmadinejad and the Quds is falling apart. The Iranian Ayatollah’s are fed up with Ahmadinejad and his Quds. You know the old saying, “You wash my hands and I’ll wash yours?” That’s what’s going on here. In this case everyone wins the trifecta. Except of course the losers. But that’s the chance one takes when ‘assuming’ a position of power. OWS is a very important movement.

  6. As with most of these plots, its clear that if the FBI had not intervened and led these people on, there would have been no event. The main point is that nothing would have been accomplished by assassinating the ambassador, except to provoke a US attack on Iran which is not in the Iranian interest, but is the goal of a lot of people here in the USA.

  7. Attacking Iran is a Zionist goal. It is not the goal of the 99% of us who are sane. Unfortunately, our Congress is controlled by American Zionists.

  8. If we ever saw O’Bama’s birth certificate, would it show that he was really born in Connecticut as a member of the Bush family?
    Just askin’.

    BTW, since we’re talking about furrin policy here, did anyone notice that an unshackled Sarah Palin, speakin’ on South Korean soil at a so-called “Knowledge Forum” (no, I’m not making that up), asked for regime change in North Korea, where peoiple are under the thumb of a dictator? (I think she’s just hopping-mad jealous that Kim Jong-Il has a better hairdresser than she does.)
    The SK gov’t had to quickly point out that this was not their policy.
    And the establishment press here has so far ignored the story.

    Sounds pretty serious to me, both her sayin’ it, and the MSM’s ignorin’ it. Sure, she’s crazy and stupid, but isn’t that the point?

Comments are closed.