Iranian Assasination Plot in the US.

[The Rev]

I'll be damned, CNN has a story along the lines of questioning the truth of the accusations.

Did an elite branch of Iran's military handpick a divorced, 56-year-old Iranian-American used-car salesman from Texas to hire a hitman from a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate the ambassador to Saudi Arabia by blowing up a bomb in a crowded restaurant in Washington?

U.S. officials say they are certain the bizarre plot against Ambassador Adel Jubeir was real.

But some analysts say they are not. They find it unlikely that the Iranian government, or legitimate factions within, would be involved in such a tangled plot.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/12/us/analysis-iran-saudi-plot/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[Cain]

There is a LOT of uncertainty about this.  The likes of Robert Baer, the CIA Mid-East specialist, have already pointed out Qods do not make a mistake like this.  If they want you dead, you wouldn't know about it until you were dead.

Lets put it this way: do some googling on the Karbala attacks by the Qods.  Then look at the current event.  You'll see a marked difference in the level of professionalism and lethality.

[Cain]

http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/alleged-iranian-assassination-plot-suspicious

US Justice Department charges that elements of Iran's government were behind a foiled plot on the life of Saudi Arabia's U.S. ambassador have boggled the minds of many Americans knowledgeable about both Iran and terrorism.

The alleged target and modus operandi – employing a Mexican drug cartel to blow up Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir at a Washington restaurant – are unusual, to say the least, for a government that has focused on political dissidents and theatres of war closer to home.

"Fishy, fishy, fishy,'' Bruce Riedel, a CIA veteran who was formerly in charge of the Near East and South Asia on the White House National Security Council, told IPS. "That Iran engages in assassinations is old news. That it would use a Mexican drug cartel would be new."

Iran has not been behind a political assassination in the United States since a year after the 1979 revolution, when an African-American convert to Islam, Daoud Salahuddin, killed the former press attaché at the Iranian Embassy, Ali Akbar Tabatabai, in a Washington suburb.

Iran was also responsible for assassinations of Iranian dissidents in Europe in the 1980s and early 1990s but used its own agents or members of Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite organization that Iran helped create following the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

Hezbollah is believed responsible for the 1983 bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut and a spate of other bombings and abductions in Lebanon.

More recently, Iran has allegedly backed local proxies responsible for the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

U.S. experts on Iranian spy agencies and tradecraft say the hare-brained scheme described in the Justice Department complaint does not resemble the operations of the Quds Force, the external arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC). Al-Quds means Jerusalem in Arabic.

"Nothing about this adds up," said Kenneth Katzman, author of a book on the IRGC and expert on Iran at the Congressional Research Service.

"Iran does not use non-Muslim groups or people who are not trusted members or associates of the Quds force," Katzman said. "Iran does not blow up buildings in Washington that invites retaliation against the Iranian homeland."

Indeed, the timing would be extremely awkward for Iran, which is already facing growing isolation because of its nuclear program and domestic abuses of human rights.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.  Why kill an Ambassador?  They're messenger boys, essentially.  Why now?  Why is it so important?  Doing so would be an act of war against the USA, which is not to Iran's benefit.  Why would Iran want to provoke a war after a decade of careful manipulation of regional events and diplomatic missions designed to reduce tensions?

I'm starting to warm to the idea that his may have an Israeli or Saudi angle to it.

[The Rev]

I'm still not unconvinced that the U.S. isn't fabricating the whole damn thing.

[Cain]

Too risky.  Fallout would be huge if something went wrong.  While my initial thoughts were along the lines of the FBI's "make your own terror cells" plot, this has elements to it which only an intelligence agency could undertake.  CIA too busy playing with predator drones for this kind of thing.

[The Rev]

Too risky.  Fallout would be huge if something went wrong.  While my initial thoughts were along the lines of the FBI's "make your own terror cells" plot, this has elements to it which only an intelligence agency could undertake.  CIA too busy playing with predator drones for this kind of thing.

You're probably right.One thing kind of stands out though, whoever was behind it seems to have wanted it to be found out.

[Cain]

Well, if it was the Israelis, they've been fucking up pretty much everything else lately....

Also, I am starting to see the outlines of a plan...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/13/us-iran-usa-plot-treaty-idUSTRE79C0SE20111013

If they were involved in a plot to kill Saudi Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir, that would likely violate the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons.

[snip]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a point on Wednesday of noting that Iran had agreed to the U.N. treaty.

"This kind of reckless act undermines international norms and the international system. Iran must be held accountable for its actions," she said.

The United States has two options if Iran officially rejects the case, including pursuing action at the U.N. Security Council. That was done when Libya refused to hand over two men accused of the Pan Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland.

The United States or Saudi Arabia could bring it to the United Nations and argue that "these are very obvious violations and for the Security Council to do nothing in light of this major attempted violation cheapens the words" of the treaty, Kaye said.

In other words, the UN could demand Qods force leaders be extradited for trial.  Which is the equivalent of taking in Navy SEAL Team 6 for questioning, ie; utterly disarming Iran's pre-eminent irregular warfare and special forces troops.

[The Rev]

Pretty sure Iran won't bend over that particular log for anyone. Iran and the UN both know that Iran would be well within its rights to demand hard evidence, and the US isn't the big UN power it thought it once was.

I don't see a happy ending here.

[Cramulus]

Ioz really does have a way with words...

http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2011/10/option-it.html

So the Iranians were going to use an American to hire a Mexican to assassinate a Saudi in Washington. Oh, ok. Let me just read from last night's NPR transcript for you. I have excerpted all you need to know:

SIEGEL: Now, the Iranians have called this a fabrication, someone called it a distraction to keep Americans from thinking about our domestic problems. How convincing is the evidence of Iran's involvement here?

GJELTEN: We really don't know.

Obviously this is going to turn into another case where the FBI tells some half-homeless loser that they're going to set him up with his own moon base and spacekreig Nazi saucer command; dude goes down to the public libarary, poops and shaves in the bathroom, gets online and tells facebook that he is going to launch an interstellar invasion of all the capitals of the planet earth; the Feds pinch the guy; and Eric Holder goes before the American People to cry Klatuu Barada Nikto until the terror cows come home. Robert Meuller says it sounds like a Hollywood script. Like the one that your waiter "accidentally" left at your table, maybe.

[Cain]

The legal paperwork surrounding this plot makes no sense.  Above and beyond the usual ways in which legal documents make no sense.

Marcy Wheeler, one of the few bloggers out there who deserves a proper journalism gig, has been looking at the various documents being filed:

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/10/11/bank-transfers-of-mass-destruction/

This complaint charges Arbabsiar and Ali Gholam Shakuri, who is apparently a Colonel in the Quds force. But the whole plot was originally conceived of by his cousin (called "Individual 1″ or "Iranian Official 1″ in the complaint), who is a Quds General "wanted in America." In addition, Arbabsiar spoke with another high-ranking Quds official. His cousin provided him the money for the plot, and directed him to carry it out.

And the FBI has evidence of the cousin's involvement; as part of Arbabsiar's confession (he waived the right to lawyer), he said,

men he understood to be senior Qods Force officials were aware of and approved, among other things, the use of [Narc] in connection with the plot; payments to [Narc]; and the means by which the Ambassador would be killed in the United States and the casualties that would likely result.

So the FBI had a Quds general directly implicated by his own cousin in a terrorist attack in the US, and another senior Quds official at least tangentially involved. But they don't indict those two, too? (Note, Fran Townsend just tweeted that Treasury imposed sanctions on these guys; will update when I get that information. Update: see below.)

The complaint may suggest they had an entirely different plan. After Arbabsiar was arrested on September 29, the FBI had him call Shakuri on several different occasions–October 4, October 5, and October 7. Claiming to be in Mexico has guarantor for the remaining 1.4 million promised for the hit, Arbabsiar told Shakuri–the complaint describes, "among other things"–that Narc wanted more money. Shakuri refused to give it to him, reminding him that he was himself the guarantee Narc would get paid. Before Abrbabsiar purportedly went to Mexico, Shakuri had warned him not to go.

All this suggests the FBI was after something else–though it's not clear what. The obvious thing is that they would use Arbabsiar as bait to get first Shakuri and possibly his cousin.

But I also note that the complaint refers to the cousin and the other Quds officer as men Arbabsiar knew to be Quds officers–as if they might be something else.

In any case, this indictment seems like a recruitment gone bad. If so, should we really have told the world we're using Los Zetas members we flipped to try to recruit Iranian spies?

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/10/13/gaps-in-the-iran-plot-docket-to-go-along-with-the-gaps-in-the-story/

There are a couple of weird aspects to the docket (click to enlarge).

First (and this is what got me looking at the docket in the first place), the complaint is an amended complaint. That says there's a previous complaint. But that complaint is not in the docket. Not only is it not in the docket, but the docket starts with the arrest on September 29 (notice the docket lists his arrest twice, on both September 29 and October 11), but the numbering starts with the amended complaint (normally, even if there were a sealed original complaint, it would be incorporated within the numbering, such that the docket might start with the amended complaint but start with number 8 or something).

Two things might explain this. First, that there was an earlier unrelated complaint–say on drug charges, but the charges are tied closely enough to this op such that this counts as an amended complaint. Alternately, that Arbabsiar was charged with a bunch of things when he was arrested on September 29, but then, after at least 12 days of cooperation (during which he waived Miranda rights each day), he was charged with something else and the new complaint incorporated Ali Gholam Shakuri's involvement, based entirely on Arbabsiar's confession and Shakuri's coded conversations with Arbabsiar while the latter was in US custody.

Both of those scenarios suggest that what we see–the WMD and terror charges–might be totally different charges than what the original complaint included (or just focused less closely on Arbabsiar). In any case, the presence of an original complaint, even putting the docket weirdness aside, makes it pretty likely that Arbabsiar decided to cooperate because of what was in that complaint.

Now look at his status. "Detention on consent without prejudice." Arbabsiar wants to be in jail. Given that his cooperation and implication of the Qods Force has turned into an international incident, I don't blame the guy.

All of which does sort of make you wonder what medical attention the court ordered for Arbabsiar.

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/10/14/the-four-month-warning-of-a-not-yet-ripe-plot/

I suspect Ha'aretz and Reuters think they're helping build credibility for the Scary Iran Plot by reporting that the Saudis warned the Argentines of the plot four months ago.

But it seems to introduce more questions than credibility.

Four months ago–assuming the anonymous Argentine diplomat is correct–would mean they were tipped off in mid-June. As Reuters points out, that may be around the time Obama first got briefed on the purported plot.

According to the complaint, the only piece of evidence the US had at that time was one unrecorded meeting between Manssor Arbabsiar and Narc. The complaint only supports that Narc learned Arbabsiar wanted to attack an embassy–consistent with the possibility of attacking the Saudi Embassy in Argentina–or maybe wanted to kidnap Adel Al-Jubeir, not kill him.

Perhaps the anonymous diplomat is off by a few weeks, and she was tipped by the Saudis in late June, after Arbabsiar had returned to Mexico on June 23, and after Arbabsiar had had another unrecorded meeting or more with Narc.

Even if that were the case, the Argentines (and Saudis) were purportedly warned before any recordings of Arbabsiar's statements were made and before any money got transferred–in spite of the fact that sources say the Administration didn't really believe in this plot until that transfer.

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/10/14/government-remains-mum-about-when-it-first-charged-arbabsiar-and-for-what/

Yesterday, I pointed out some oddities of the docket for Manssor Arbabsiar, the accused plotter in the Iran assassination plot. Most notably, the docket for this crime starts with the amended complaint. That indicated there was an original complaint. But the numbering on the docket–which starts with the amendment complaint–suggested the original complaint might relate to an entirely different crime.

bmaz called the court house to try to figure out the oddity. And court personnel did some checking–and consulted directly with the AUSA trying this case–they explained only that there had been a prior complaint in SDNY which Chief Judge Loretta Preska had approved having sealed. The court house offered no insight on when all this happened.

The government's unwillingness to unseal that original complaint is just another weird aspect of this case, as it suggests Arbabsiar might have been arrested for totally different charges. Or he might have been charged months ago.

http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/10/17/scary-iran-plot-follow-the-money/

Money was exchanged, but for what?

Before I lay out what the money details show, though, let's lay out the many possible operations the money paid for. According to Manssor Arbabsiar's confession, his cousin Abdul Reza Shahlai told him to go get drug traffickers to kidnap the Saudi Ambassador. Arbabsiar's confession says it evolved into a capture or kill deal (though says it did so in conversations with Gholam Shakuri and Hamed Abdollahi, not Shahlai). The complaint also mentions plans of "attacking an embassy of Saudi Arabia" (Narc's account of the May 24 meeting with Arbabsiar), for "a number of violent missions" (Narc's account of purportedly unrecorded June-July meetings), "the murder of the Ambassador" (Narc's account of purportedly unrecorded June-July meetings), and targeting foreign government facilities located outside of the United States, associated with Saudi Arabia and with another country [reported to be Israel]" (footnote 6 describing what Narc reported from these earlier meetings). The quotes from July 14 are ambiguous whether they refer to kidnapping or assassination of al-Jubeir. The quotes from July 17 include clear reference to killing what is presumably (thought not specified as) al-Jubeir. And note what the complaint rather damningly doesn't mention, though Administration leakers admit?

The plotters also discussed a side deal between the Quds Force, part of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and Los Zetas to funnel tons of opium from the Middle East to Mexico, the official said.

In other words, several things were being negotiated: the kidnapping and/or assassination of al-Jubeir, hits on embassies in Argentina, possibly some other horrible things, and drug deals. So we need to be careful to tie any payments to specific ops.

The use of two different codes in the taped conversations doesn't make tying payments to specific ops any easier–the complaint mentions "painting," or "doing" a building (September 2, 20, and October 4), which the FBI Agent interprets without stated confirmation in Arbabsiar's confession as the murder, as well as the "Chevrolet" (October 5 and 7), which Arbabsiar's confession says also referred to the murder (syntactically, though, the Chevrolet sounds like a drug deal, while the building seems more closely connected to the murder).

Finally, a conversation on September 12 seems to suggest (though the FBI Agent doesn't interpret it this way) that Arbabsiar had presented Narc several choices of operations, and the plotters just wanted them to pick one to carry out. After insisting the price would be "one point five," Arbabsiar told Narc, for example, that he could "prepare for those too [two] ... but we need at least one of them" [ellipsis original]. He went on to say that if Narc did "at least one ... I'll send the balance for you" [ellipsis original]. Particularly given the two different codes–building and Chevrolet–it seems possible there were still at least two different operations (both Arbabsiar and Shakuri offer up the building, not the Chevrolet, when they are not being coached as the operation they're most anxious about). At the very least, this means that two months after the two meetings supposedly finalizing the plan for the assassination, both the price and the objective remained unclear.

No quoted passage ties the $100,000, the $1.5 million, and the assassination

See what I mean?

[Triple Zero]

No, I'm completely lost, sorry

[Cain]

There is no proof the money transfer was for an assassination. 

Arbabsiar discussed a number of deals with the Los Zetas narc, and it just so happens the one involving assassinating the Saudi Ambassador was not recorded.

Arbabsiar was originally under arrest for different charges than he is now.  The previous reasons for his arrests are sealed.

Arbabsiar wants to be in custody.

The recorded phone discussions sound more like a drugs deal than a hit.

Arbabsiar's attorney seems pretty convinced there is going to be some kind of deal, and that he will never see a courtroom.

[Faust]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1017/iran.html

Funny timing. Glad the world has found its new villian.

[The Rev]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1017/iran.html

Funny timing. Glad the world has found its new villian.

I wonder if anyone has taken the time to vet Ahmed Shaheed's report.