Sunni dogs and Shiite cats living together, the story nobody is talking about.
What if I told you that the Shiite theocracy in Iran had been found by a federal court to be legally responsible for training Sunni al Qaeda to carry out attacks against the United States as far back as at least 1998, at least? What if I told you this had happened over a month ago. You’d probably say, “Hey man, that’s a big deal, we’ve been told for the past decade that Iran can’t be working with al Qaeda, they hate each other. Besides, the media would be all over that.” Right?
Drum roll please…
According to Thomas Joscelyn at The Long War Journal this is exactly what happened. According to the decision handed down by D.C. District Court Judge John D. Bates the Iranian regime has been using al Qaeda as a tool to attack US interests around the world and gave them the training they needed to attack our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. To quote from the ruling:
Iran had been the preeminent state sponsor of terrorism against United States interests for decades. Throughout the 1990s – at least – Iran regarded al Qaeda as a useful tool to destabilize U.S. interests. As discussed in detail below, the government of Iran aided, abetted and conspired with Hezbollah, Osama bin Laden, and al Qaeda to launch large-scale bombing attacks against the United States by utilizing the sophisticated delivery mechanism of powerful suicide truck bombs. Hezbollah, a terrorist organization based principally in Lebanon, had utilized this type of bomb in the devastating 1983 attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. Prior to their meetings with Iranian officials and agents, Bin Laden and al Qaeda did not possess the technical expertise required to carry out the embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. The Iranian defendants, through Hezbollah, provided explosives training to Bin Laden and al Qaeda and rendered direct assistance to al Qaeda operatives. Hence, for the reasons discussed below the Iranian defendants provided material aid and support to al Qaeda for the 1998 embassy bombings and are liable for damages suffered by the plaintiffs.
The only notice this got the media is a brief editorial by Hoover Fellow Marc Thiessen in the Washington Post.
It’s no doubt worth noting that both Judge Bates and Mr. Thiessen are connected to former President George W. Bush. Bates was appointed by Bush and Thiessen worked in the WH as a speechwriter. Both have proved to be a real fly in the ointment of the left over the past ten years. I can’t help but think the media blackout of what is, quite frankly, a historical ruling is interconnected.
UPDATE:
For those interested the entire opinion can be found here.
Category: Foreign Policy, Legal, Politics
That Iran worked with al-Qaeda can be found in chapter 7 of the 9/11 Commission Report, so the news is far from recent.
This is where we need a competent lawyer in the house, because I’m far from impressed with a ruling by default judgement in an open/unclass court hearing. I know very well of AQ’s on again, off again involvement with Tehran, but the Judge’s ruling is rather meaningless.
And ironically, though I can’t remember where I heard the news off this first, it is available at MSNBC, WaPo, CBS, AP, etc…
re #1
Yes there was a tangential relationship established in the 9/11 report but it makes pains to assert the relationship was largely logistical and transitory without any real base of knowledge concerning al Qaeda operations. This ruling on the other hand finds Iran to be culpable, as a national actor, for using al Qaeda in an operational capacity and training them for specific attacks on American targets. The difference is profound.
re #2
I couldn’t find any MSM sources you mentioned reporting on the ruling. Do you have any links?
Here are a few that I still had open in tabs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ny-judge-rules-iran-taliban-al-qaida-were-liable-in-sept-11-attacks-damages-not-yet-set/2011/12/22/gIQAugJPCP_story.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20642644/ns/world_news-terrorism/t/iran-rejects-us-fine-beirut-bombing/#.Tv8PcHEgf6g
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501713_162-57348233/iran-rejects-ny-judges-ruling-on-sept-11-attacks/
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57347506/judge-iran-taliban-al-qaeda-liable-for-9-11/
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/iran-rejects-ny-judges-ruling-sept-11-attacks-15230144#.Tv8S3nEgf6g
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20terror.html?_r=1 (This from May 2011)
re #5
The MSNBC link is a different case, the Beirut bombings not affiliated with al Qaeda and the rest all seem to stem from a case in a court in Manhattan presided over by Judge George Daniels. None are for the case I linked out to. I’ll have to look more them anyway though, I’m curious as to that one now as well.
As a possible aside Daniels is a Clinton appointee.
Ack…you’re right. I knew that I had just recently heard of a judge’s ruling on Iranian culpability in the media.
Read this a few weeks ago, what makes it unique is proving it in court.
Secondly it has always been a myth that Sunni jihadis and Shia jihadis won’t work together. They have done so before if it furthers a mutual interest.
Third there is a misconception about how the Islamic world(especially Iran) use proxies. Unlike the communists of the Cold war, they tend to support more then one and usually competing entities. Even if logically this may disperse their efforts and risk possible objective failure. This allows more plausible deniabilty and no matter who eventually succeeds they have a connection to any victor.
We see this from the Mujahideen parties sponsored by the Pakistanis fighting the Soviets in Aghanistan and a near similar repeat of said today. Another good example is with Iran in the Iran/Iraq war and the US in Iraq today.
And this affects me. .. how?
Not to show indifference to what’s going on in the geopolitical world around me, but with this current Lefturd administration, and the poor choices from the GOP side, I can’t see anyone doing anything about to act on this ruling anytime soon. Unless Our Dear Leader swaps out his muzzie pussy for a set of American balls real quick. As if.
@2. You don’t need really a competent lawyer so I’ll be happy to help! I’m not sure what the question is but if it has anything to do with the precedential effect of the ruling, there is none. I’m sure it was a fun exercise for the judge’s clerk and, perhaps, the judge himself, but outside of that, nada.
@10 – That’s sort of what I figured but not being that well versed in legalese, I wasn’t sure; I didn’t see anything tangible coming out of the ruling. Thanks!