The plot at JFK Airport — redux

June 4, 2007

Following up on an item from the weekend, the terrorist plot at JFK Airport in New York certainly sounds like the kind of attack that could, in theory, do very serious damage. And to echo a point I raised on Saturday, the officials who were involved with uncovering the plot and arresting the suspects deserve the nation’s gratitude.

But it’s worth keeping in mind that the potential for damage was great, but the terrorist plot itself was far more talk than action.

[T]he criminal complaint filed by the federal authorities against the four defendants in the case — one of them, Abdel Nur, remained at large yesterday — suggests a less than mature terror plan, a proposed effort longer on evil intent than on operational capability.

(Ms. Mauskopf noted in her news release that the “public was never at risk” and told reporters that law enforcement “had stopped this plot long before it ever had a chance to be carried out.”)

At its heart was a 63-year-old retired airport cargo worker, Russell M. Defreitas, who the complaint says talked of his dreams of inflicting massive harm, but who appeared to possess little money, uncertain training and no known background in planning a terror attack.

“Capability low, intent very high,” a law enforcement official said of the suspects.

Some law enforcement officials and engineers also dismissed the notion that the planned attack could have resulted in a catastrophic chain reaction; system safeguards, they said, would have stopped explosions from spreading.

The complaint, filed in Federal District Court in Brooklyn, also suggests that at least two of the suspects had some ambivalence. One of the men was game for bombing the airport but leery about killing masses of people, the complaint says. Another dropped out of the plot for a time to tend to his business.

Just to be clear, any potential plots deserve serious scrutiny, and I applaud law-enforcement officials for intervening before those who might do us harm have a chance to set their plans in motion.

But over the weekend, the media frequently characterized this as some kind of dodged-bullet. That’s wrong. As the NYT noted today, “[A]s with many post-9/11 terror plots, the line between terrible aspiration and reality can get lost in a murky haze.”

Indeed, as Josh Marshall noted over the weekend, Russell Defreitas, the key plotter, appears to be a little confused.

“Anytime you hit Kennedy, it is the most hurtful thing to the United States. To hit John F. Kennedy, wow … they love JFK — he’s like the man. If you hit that, this whole country will be in mourning. It’s like you can kill the man twice.”

Defreitas also appeared to think that blowing up a gas line at JFK would bring the US economy to its knees: “Even the Twin Towers can’t touch it. This can destroy the economy of America for some time.”

And Anonymous Liberal’s take also sounds about right to me.

[T]his plan had about as much chance of working as their first plan, which involved constructing a full-functioning replica of the Death Star and using it to terrorize the planet….

Why is it that every terrorist “plot” that has been “thwarted” over the last few years has been almost cartoonishly amateur? Are all terrorists really just a bunch of halfwits trying to play jihad in their mothers’ basements?

Something to keep in mind when considering news reports about the latest thwarted plot.

Pardon me for stating the obvious, but the US economy manages to keep chugging even when JFK is closed for bad weather.

When does “Capability low, intent very high” become a criminal matter? Suppose I want to kill my neighbor, but I don’t have a gun. I’ve never directly threatened my neighbor, but I have been overheard gun shopping. Is that enough for the authorities to step in an “thwart” me?

P.S. This does not count as me threatening my neighbor.

  • Gee, this all makes it seem that terrorisim is a law enforcement problem, not a military problem. Who knew?

  • Again, good for law enforcement for getting on to this plot and interrupting it before it could go any further. It just strikes me though, that there is more value for law enforcement, and for the general sense of security, for the emphasis to be on how early into the planning they were able to stop it, rather than what the administration and the media are doing, which is emphasizing the horror that would have ensued had they not.

    The administration seems to want us to be sitting on the razor’s edge of fear all the time, being constantly worried whether the FBI and the CIA are up to the job of keeping us safe, and the media – dutiful stenographers that they are – play right along. They play on the failures prior to 9/11, and that has allowed there to be an unspoken warning: “We’re not sure these guys are really up to the job, so if there is to be any hope of being safe, you need to let us take some pretty extreme liberties with things like privacy rights and torture.”

  • ***…a proposed effort longer on evil intent than on operational capability.***

    So that would mean that Wile E. Coyote should be arrested in each and every Road Runner cartoon for fomenting a terrorist act. After all, we’re talking “cartoonish” here. But now, I suppose that my nefariously evil plot to send all conservatives screaming in terror into the sea, by painting a giant replica of Keith Olbermann’s face on the moon, is simply out of the question….

  • Interesting how the government didn’t take the Intelligence Briefing seriously in August 2001 in regards to Osama Bin Laden having intentions of attacking within the US. Although several years earlier someone had been arrested who described exactly such a plot, with the only exception, he was planning on flying into the CIA headquarters instead of the 9/11 attack.

    Now everybody and their dog who thinks of becoming a terrorist, regardless of how ‘dumb’ they are, are considered SERIOUS threats.

    I applaude that law enforcement was able to stop this plot before it got any further. If they were talking about it, they deserve to be imprisoned. BUT for the Bush administration to bellow as it would have been worse than the twin towers… give me a break. Has anybody ever seen on TV when one of those fuel tanks goes up in flames? Very spectacular, but there are so many safety features that it wouldn’t even be a big deal other than the visual effect. It’s not like one tank ignites the next, whether it is through the underground pipes or jumping flames…. That’s what the Bushies would want us to believe but that is not reality.

  • The media does deserve all the blame they are getting for uncritically cooperating with the authorities in sensationalizing the threat, but the primary blame does rest with the authorities.

    At Saturday’s new conference conducted by Michael Balboni (New York’s Deputy Secretary to the Governor for Public Security), New York Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, U.S. Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf and Mark J. Mershon (Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s New York field office), the plot was hyped out of all proportion to the real threat.

    Mershon said yesterday (in the NYT article CB links to): “I believe I spoke the simple truth at the press conference: the ambitions were horrific, the capacities were very limited, but they kept trying. Their signature was their persistence.”

    If that had been the basic message of the press conference, there would be no controversy and no criticism. Only kudos for foiling the plot.

  • “Capability low, intent very high,” a law enforcement official said of the suspects.

    What Grumpy said. This should scare the shit out of every person who is worried about the erosion of the Constitution. I’ve never heard Intent defined as “Talking about it (in a not very sane manner).” PAs want evidence the accused had some means to carry out the crime, because criminal conspiracy cases tend to fall apart without solid evidence, as they should. If you make speech the threshold for conspiracy … I think you can figure out where that leads us.

    Let’s take Grumpy’s example a bit further: Instead of saying he wants to kill his neighbor he says “One of these days I’m gonna deck that guy.” He says it a lot. He already has his “weapons,” and access to his target. Should the cops leap on him and haul him off for conspiracy to commit assault and battery?

    Or put another way, do you want the cops to have the ability to leap on him and haul him off for conspiracy?

    A case like this (if it’s successful) could easily lower the bar for intent to a point that everyone, every where is “guilty” of conspiring to commit a crime.

    and I applaud law-enforcement officials for intervening before those who might do us harm have a chance to set their plans in motion.

    With all due respect CB, are you high? How can you deplore Gitmo one moment and the next applaud the arrest of some people who might have done us harm if they ever formed a viable plan that they had a chance in hell of pulling off?

    Shit, there’s people out there who would gladly release giant radioactive roaches in a large city … if they could just get their hands on some nuclear cucarachas. There are plain old thugs out there who’d gladly knock the crap out of a guy for his wallet and if the circumstances are right, they will. If the thought of people who might do us harm really bothers you, I’m not sure how you sleep at night.

    And speaking of Guantanamo, do we know where these guys are being held? Not all of them are US citizens. Is there anything to stop the military from gaining custody of these knuckleheads? Does anyone care, or does a half-arsed dream of “Killing” Kennedy a second time mean they’re no longer worthy of such concerns?

  • This law enforcement approach is okay I guess, but I won’t feel really safe until we occupy another country. Even a smaller one would do.

  • So whatever happened to the whackjobs from Miami?
    Or the guy who wanted to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches?

    Did they get Gitmoed?

  • the terrorist plot at JFK Airport in New York certainly sounds like the kind of attack that could, in theory, do very serious damage.

    I don’t know what part of WingerWorld you’re vacationing in, CB, that you could say this in the face of all the information that it couldn’t have done SQUAT.

    Here in RealityWorld – where the laws of physics work – there was no possible way they could have lit off the gas in such a way it would create a “backblast” through the whole system. If such was possible, you wouldn’t be able to use a gas stove.

    And then there’s the informant: a drug dealer “caught up in a world of terrorism.” Yeah, right, a junkie scumbag gets caught by the cops and looks for the way out guys like him do, and comes up with a “plot” that not only gets him out of jail but gets them to give him money to continue working on solving it.

    And the “leader” of this so-called “conspiracy” was about as capable of carrying it out as Marinus van der Lubbe was of burning down the Reichstag.

    These “counter terrorist” bozos are now zero for three. Not one of their “terrorists” they’ve caught was capable of doing anything, and every one of them was prodded to try and proceed by a government-paid agent provocateur. Hell, they don’t even try and hide it anymore!

    Like the old Navy Chief told me long long ago: “Believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see.” When it comes to the American Geheimstatspolizei, you can shorten it to “Believe nothing.” If they tell you it’s Monday, check three calendars and get two independent confirmations.

    There are lies and damned lies, and what flows from the American NKVD are goddamned lies.

    I’m surprised a guy as smart as you, CB, is being taken in by this obvious bullshit.

  • EVERYTHING that is even remotely connected with the doings of Bush Inc. has the stench of fraud on it, this ‘terrorist’ plot included. These guys were incompetent losers with a snitch as one of the ringleaders. They would more likely have blown themselves up than anything else.

  • Even if these nitwits had somehow managed to pull off their plan, it wouldn’t have caused 3% of the initial reports of damage. It’s like trying to blow up your city by lighting your stove. Could they have done some damage? Certainly. Blowing up some jet fuel will do that. But the entire pipeline? Pah-lease. They might have shut down JFK for a couple days – much like a bad blizzard.

    Should terrorists threats be taken seriously? Of course they should. But it gets difficult when they regularly celebrate foiled schemes that Wyle E. Coyote would have rejected.

    • Comments are closed.