| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
On the JFK Airport jihad terror plot at FrontPage this morning (news links in the original):
In August 2006, Russell “Mohammed” Defreitas, a retired employee of New York’s JFK Airport, confided to an acquaintance his “vision” for a jihad terror attack that, he said, would make the attack on the World Trade Center seem small. The plot involved placing bombs in jet fuel lines in the airport, thereby destroying the airport and probably killing thousands.Besides the mayhem and economic devastation this plot would cause, Defreitas seemed to have been fond of it because of its symbolic value: “Anytime you hit Kennedy, it is the most hurtful thing to the United States,” he told his acquaintance, who was a man whom he thought he knew from a mosque in Brooklyn and who was actually an informant. “To hit John F. Kennedy, wow...They love John F. Kennedy like he’s the man... If you hit that, the whole country will be in mourning. It’s like you can kill the man twice.” Despite having gained U.S. citizenship, Defreitas, a Guyanese by birth, clearly hates his new country, and wishes to demoralize it in service of its enemies.
Defreitas and his fellow plotters were arrested Friday, with their plot nowhere near completion. One of the other plotters was Abdul Kadir, an imam and a former member of the Guyanese parliament. According to the Wall Street Journal, the plotters were not members of Al-Qaeda, but had some connection with a little-known jihadist group in Trinidad, Jamaat al Muslimeen. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Knox said of Defreitas: “He is the self-proclaimed brainchild of an elaborate plot to blow up JFK airport. His stated goal was to kill as many people as possible.”
Early news reports noted, “the arrests mark the latest in a series of homegrown terrorism plots that targeted high-profile American landmarks.” And indeed, Knox’s words were an eerie echo of the Fort Dix jihad terror plot that was unmasked in May, in which the plotters hoped to kill as many soldiers as possible. The Fort Dix and JFK plotters are evidently among the thirteen percent of Muslims in the United States who support suicide attacks in some circumstances, and these two cases, one following so closely on the other, raise all the more urgently the questions of what American officials can and must do in order to minimize the possibility that one day, one plot like these will succeed.These plots show again that one need not be a member of Al-Qaeda or some other recognized terror organization in order to plan a jihad terror attack. All one needs is the conviction that the supreme deity wants those who believe in him to commit mass murder, and will reward them for doing so. Assuring us that the vast majority of believers don’t believe this is not enough, as long as that majority does little or nothing to root out the minority who do believe it, and to resist the spread of such views. After the Fort Dix plot was uncovered, mainstream media coverage was much preoccupied with Muslim fears of “backlash” attacks that in reality never materialized, and not preoccupied at all with asking Muslims what they intended to do to make sure that Muslims in the U.S. were taught against the jihad ideology that many of them manifestly hold. About the Pew Research Center poll of American Muslims that showed significant support for suicide bombing and Al-Qaeda, I wrote last week:
Almost six years after 9/11, no pressure is coming either from the mainstream media or law enforcement for Muslim groups in the United States to institute comprehensive educational programs against jihadism in their mosques and schools. This poll, however, shows how much such programs are needed – as well as a national debate about how these groups should be regarded if they refuse or fail to implement such programs.The JFK plot only makes those programs, and that debate, all the more urgent. Russell Defreitas hated his adoptive land and believed that Islam commanded him to bring it to its knees. What was he learning in the mosque in Brooklyn where he believed he had seen the government informant before? Do any law enforcement officials know the answer to that question? As long as American Muslim groups do not formally renounce the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism that would destroy American Constitutional government and replace it with Shari’a, and do not expel those who refuse to renounce these beliefs in word and deed, American mosques must be monitored, and American Muslims called to account for harboring this menace.
But before these and other necessary actions can be taken, some mainstream media figures will have to have the courage to pierce the fog of political correctness that envelops us and call for such measures. Those who are looking for an opportunity to demonstrate their courage and patriotism have a superb chance to do so now.
Posted by Robert at June 4, 2007 6:48 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"American mosques must be monitored..."
...absolutely....
Posted by: exsgtbrown![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 4, 2007 6:54 AM
American mosques must be monitored..."
actually better if they were demoslished, as well as all mosques in Western lands.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at June 4, 2007 7:21 AM
As long as American Muslim groups do not formally renounce the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism that would destroy American Constitutional government and replace it with Shari’a, and do not expel those who refuse to renounce these beliefs in word and deed, American mosques must be monitored, and American Muslims called to account for harboring this menace.
These expectations are delusional.
On what quaranic basis would such "moderate muslims" -- assuming they exist -- be compelled to renounce "jihad ideology or islamic supremacism?"
And why the expectation that the American government has the stomach to monitor mosques?
I can see where they will go after churches using the IRS; but they wouldn't dare go after mosques.
If they did, CAIR and the ACLU will be all over the US taxpayer like a cheap-suit.
at June 4, 2007 7:22 AM
exsgtbrown is correct.
ZenaWarriorPrincess point about monitoring is very important.
As a public service, someone at Jihad Watch needs to keep a list of people arrested in the U.S. for Islamic atrocities or plots which should specifically keep a running list of the precise name and address of the mosque(s) the arrested person frequented. This list of mosque(s) with associated criminal's name may be a useful police, security, and public service tool. We know these individuals contrary to press and politically correct speech are part of a communal cabal. Let's keep track of their dens for self protection. From which mosque(s) in New York or New Jersey did these fiends originate?
Posted by: David England at June 4, 2007 7:34 AM
islamists working in our system, profiting from it, then like snakes turning upon it.
Have the Dems even begun to address the issue of evil ?
The only good jihadi is a dead one. Track this thought back to their supporters and enablers, and it is apparent that we must have a dog in this fight.
Posted by: dgene at June 4, 2007 8:12 AM
Guyana??? Trinidad??? I think the time to remove this spreading verman that is Islam from the face of the planet, but fast. These people are hailing from non-traditional Muslim nations, and that is more alarming than if they were from say Jordan or Egypt. Round them all up and send them to Club GITMO for a little water fun. And stop the PC BS that will get us all killed!
Posted by: Oiznop at June 4, 2007 8:17 AM
I worked with a guy who was involved with a fuel pipeline project that exploded. Everything near the explosion, including people, was simply vaporized, as in no bones. But as sobering as this plot is, it boils down to a baggage handler and a couple of hacks with the simple idea of putting a bomb by a fuel line. It might of worked.
The real threat is not a baggage handler and a couple of drug dealers from Guyana. The real threat is the Iranian engineers and chemists that we have dutifully educated and currently employ by the tens of thousands. They don’t talk.
*** PC disclaimer: Some or most of these tens of thousands of people are good. ***
Reality check: Statistically, some do not share the same American Dream as the rest of us. A certain percentage feel allegiance to their Persian heritage and Muslim faith. That is only natural.
The damage that a few dozen trained operatives could do to the critical infrastructure of our society is unimaginable. Savage speculated that the recent Presidential Directive might be intended to push through the immigration bill, or to silence conservative criticism, or to turn over the reigns to Hillary. The way I see it, the Directive is in preparation for a likely breakdown in government function in the aftermath of action against the Iranian nuclear project.
Can you live without electricity? That means no running water, no food deliveries to the grocery stores, no refrigeration. When our government goes into a country, the decision is made whether to turn out the lights for days, weeks, months, or years. Its easiest to work in years because you don’t need to get fancy. Recess is almost over and Wal Mart still sells ammunition.
Posted by: pez at June 4, 2007 8:26 AM
Just one question.
Why are moslems still allowed to work in sensitive areas? Moslems should be barred from working at airports. You just cannot trust them.
at June 4, 2007 11:22 AM
Can you tell a "Good Muslim" from a "Bad Muslim"?
Can you tell an apostasizing Muslim (a Muslim for identification purposes only) from a true-believer?
Until then, they're all guilty.
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at June 4, 2007 1:42 PM
Time for a gathering of all Muslims in Mecca where they can sort through their 'faith' problems and leave us out of their ongoing holy war.
Whatever came out of such a conclave, we could then treat honestly.
Till them, their loyalties are Koranically suspect.
at June 4, 2007 2:26 PM
Already the apologists are lining up saying the man was entrapped by the FBI. They don't trust the informant because he was seeking a way to reduce his sentence on another conviction.
Learning that this informant was looking for a better deal for himself should make you ask whether this plot would still be ongoing if RD had chosen someone else in whom to confide his dreams of destruction. For that matter, DID he tell others, who kept quiet because they thought he was nuts?
This informant was in the right place at the right time but who will be there next time?
Posted by: PMK at June 4, 2007 4:23 PM
To answer the question posted above: Why are moslems still allowed to work in sensitive areas?
Because this is the land of the free and home of the brave - for about 10 more minutes.
We better start cracking down.
Posted by: PLCinTEXAS at June 5, 2007 7:31 AM
I'm glad that I check out Jihad Watch every day. I've learned a lot here and the posters here are always very intelligent and informative. Thank you to all of you for helping me to keep my insanity in the mess the world is in.
I just wanted to thank all of the posters here (I know it's off topic-sorry), because I checked out the Frontpage forum and non of the posters there said anything about Roberts great article. Non of them had any lengthy, intelligent thing to say. It's sad. I should send them a link to Jihad Watch so they can see how to engage in a real debate about the topic at hand.
Posted by: mrockroll1969 at June 5, 2007 9:27 AM
Ref David England and his proposed list (see above):
An excellent idea but surely not one for Jihad Watch which already has so much on its plate. It should be done by Homeland Security/FBI/whatever. Perhaps JW could contact someone higher up and set this idea in motion?
at June 5, 2007 9:24 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)