February 08, 2010 Viet Nam, Holder, Obama, and the Christmas Day Terrorist

AMERICAN THINKER.COM By Robert Bowie Johnson, Jr.

On Christmas Day, Attorney General Eric Holder decided to prevent the obtaining of crucial enemy intelligence from airline terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab by granting him the "right" to remain silent. The implicit negative consequences of that decision pertaining to our future safety reminded me of a stark and positive contrast to Holder's dangerous way of dealing with captured enemy combatants.

In April of 1968, I was a young infantry captain operating near the coast of Quang Nam Province in South Viet Nam. We captured prisoners who meant us grievous harm. Go back there with me for a few minutes, see how we handled that kind of situation, and then we'll return to today and examine Eric Holder's actions with that context in mind.

An enemy sapper battalion, with a method of operation akin to those of today's terrorists, had caused us many casualties and much fear. Operating at night, using pipe bombs, teams of enemy sappers blew gaps in the roads we traveled and booby-trapped the ways around those gaps. Sometimes they booby-trapped the gap itself.

Too often, the sappers planted high explosives under the roadways and waited in concealment for a convoy to enter the kill zone before detonating their bombs. Traveling those roads became a terrifying experience.

Our colonel resolved to attack the enemy battalion's base camp and destroy these sappers. On the first day of our regimental operation, I radioed my superior that my unit had captured three enemies. Within fifteen minutes, a major choppered in to pick up the prisoners -- a very dangerous act for him and the pilot, as we were still in contact with the enemy.

We threw our bound prisoners into the chopper, and it flew off hugging the landscape to avoid enemy fire. The major did not take the prisoners to an ACLU lawyer in the hopes that within a month or so, their parents could be contacted, at which point said parents could hopefully persuade their captured children to talk.

Well-trained military intelligence officers conducted the interrogations, knowing which prisoner to focus on and how to question him. They forced the most vulnerable prisoner to reveal where the sapper battalion's main defenses were, and when the enemy intended to mass there.

Our colonel immediately prepared what is known as a T.O.T., or Time-On-Target. The shells of all our big guns within range (105s, 155s, 175s, and even naval batteries from what I believe was the battleship New Jersey) were plotted to hit the enemy position simultaneously. It was our turn to terrify the sappers.

The effect of this massive artillery barrage exceeded our expectations. We met no resistance when we swept through the area, finding more than thirty enemy killed by shrapnel from the airbursts. Better yet, we found that their command bunker had been penetrated by a shell with a delayed-action fuse, killing all ten of its high-ranking occupants. The terrorizing attacks on our region's roadways ceased.

That was a textbook tactical situation where the prompt interrogation of captured enemy combatants led to successful battlefield results, ultimately saving the lives of many American soldiers, perhaps mine included. We treated prisoners as intelligence assets to be promptly exploited, not as criminal suspects absurdly presumed to be innocent prior to some kind of moronic trial for show.

Let's go back now to the current strategic situation where the safety of every American civilian is at stake, and where the Attorney General and the President of the United States, the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, are responsible for preventing the immediate interrogation of an enemy combatant from taking place.

Terrorist Abdulmutallab's failed bombing attempt on the civilian U.S. airliner on Christmas day led to his immediate capture. Before even an hour had passed, Attorney General Eric Holder, acting under the authority of Barack Hussein Obama, provided an attorney for this enemy combatant, forbidding the gathering of enemy intelligence crucial to the safety of the American people from future terrorist acts.

Holder's decision to protect Abdulmutallab from interrogation has facilitated enemy efforts to continue surprise terror attacks against American citizens at home and abroad. Thus, Holder and Obama have given a measure of aid to our enemies.

Whatever cripples our efforts to close with and destroy our enemies empowers those enemies to kill and maim us. Knowing that their captured comrades will not be subject to standard military interrogations doubtless comes as a great relief to our sworn enemies. Al-Qaeda leaders know full well that the granting of constitutional rights to their fellow terrorists helps keep secret the time, nature, and place of their future attacks. Thus, Holder and Obama have given not only aid to our enemies, but a measure of comfort as well.

Holder and Obama cannot take back or justify what they have done. However hard they may try, their propagandists cannot tinsel over Holder's and Obama's dereliction of duty by cleverly embellishing their excuses. By protecting the terrorist from immediate interrogation, Holder and Obama delivered a sledgehammer blow to the framework of our national security. Who knows how much crucial information on planned enemy strikes has been lost as a result of their ineptitude and betrayal of the public trust?

Upon taking office, Holder solemnly swore that he would "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Yet instead of supporting and defending the Constitution against foreign enemy Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Holder shielded the terrorist from interrogation, using our founding document as his pretext for doing so. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution for granting constitutional rights to enemy combatants. By granting Abdulmutallab such rights, Holder has violated his oath of office.

In the event that anyone has missed the point, here is the crux of the matter: Instead of acting to protect us from enemy combatants, Eric Holder acted to protect an enemy combatant from revealing what he knew about planned terrorist operations directed against us. In doing so, Holder has demonstrated an unfathomable indifference to our national security and person safety.

If Obama and Holder had been a major and a captain in my outfit in Viet Nam, they would have compromised our mission, caused casualties to mount, and caused morale to plummet. Think of yourself as a soldier operating today against our enemies in Iraq or Afghanistan. Would you want Obama or Holder in your immediate chain of command? No, you would not.

The sad and tragic truth for us today is that these two incompetents are running the whole show.

Mr. Johnson, a West Point graduate and an airborne ranger infantry veteran of Viet Nam, is the author of The Parthenon Code: Mankind's History in Marble and Noah in Ancient Greek Art. He is also the inventor of the board game "Obozo's America: Why Bother Working for a Living?" His websites are welfaregame.com and solvinglight.com.

Eric Holder: I ordered Miranda rights

KASIE HUNT | 2/3/10 4:09 PM EST

Attorney General Eric Holder says he made the decision to read the underwear bomber suspect his Miranda rights — and he’s hammering Republicans for politicizing a practice he says they backed when George W. Bush was in office.

“I made the decision to charge Mr. Abdulmutallab with federal crimes, and to seek his detention in connection with those charges, with the knowledge of, and with no objection from, all other relevant departments of the government,” Holder wrote in a letter to senators Monday.

He called the decision “fully consistent” with precedents set by “administrations of both parties.”

“Those policies and practices, which were not criticized when employed by previous administrations, have been and remain extremely effective in protecting national security,” he said.

The Holder letter is the Obama administration’s latest round in an ongoing battle with congressional Republicans, who have accused the president of jeopardizing national security by informing the alleged terror plotter of his right to remain silent.

Holder said intelligence and law enforcement officials explicitly discussed whether to use the military tribunal system to try Abdulmutallab.

“No agency supported the use of law of war detention for Abdulmutallab, and no agency has since advised the Department of Justice that an alternative course of action should have been, or should now be, pursued,” Holder wrote.

He also said Republican demands to place Abdulmutallab in a military system would be impossible to meet.

"There is no court-approved system currently in place in which suspected terrorists captured inside the United States can be detained and held without access to an attorney; nor is there any known mechanism to persuade an uncooperative individual to talk to the government that has been proven more effective than the criminal justice system," Holder wrote. (Why? Those rules were suppose to change after 9/11 - so why, after almost 10 years are there not court-approved system in place for suspected terrorists?! Bee)

Congressional Republicans are demanding that Holder appear on Capitol Hill to testify about the decision.

“It’s time for the attorney general to account for his decisions. It’s time for these policies to meet the light of day — and for the public to get the answers they deserve,” Judiciary Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions of Alabama said Wednesday. He sent a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy Wednesday morning, and a Republican aide said Holder’s letter didn’t offer a full accounting and that senators would still push for him to appear.

Leahy shot back with a letter to Sessions Wednesday afternoon. “Had you discussed this matter with me, you might have realized that such a partisan and divisive letter was unnecessary and unhelpful. I hope that in the weeks and months ahead, instead of trying to create division and score political points, you and the other Republican members of the committee will join with me and work with the administration on behalf of the American people, as we did after the 9/11 attacks,” Leahy wrote.

Leahy said Holder will testify before the committee, most likely in March.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32486.html#ixzz0eYbtwRDg

Al-Qaeda emboldened even by underwear bomber's failure

AMERICAN THINKER
By: Steve McCann

With the Keystone Kops quality of the drama that played out on Christmas Day concerning the Nigerian underwear bomber one has to wonder if this was not a deliberate effort by the Al Qaeda leadership to find out how much the Obama Administration, through its appeasement mindset, had degraded the Bush security efforts. Had the naive terrorist succeeded it would have been a bonus.

This young impressionable Muslim could not have made his intentions more obvious had he worn a sign stating: "I am a terrorist, carrying a bomb in my underwear, planning to blow up this plane."

In fact he: bought a one way ticket using cash, he had no luggage, did not have a passport, had a Muslim name and was on a watch list. Not to mention he had been denied a visa to the United Kingdom, the hot bed of radical Islamic activity in Europe. Any one of these factors should have been enough to prevent his getting on the plane and in the immediate seven years following 9/11 they would have been.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was the perfect foil for an Al Qaeda production. Being young, impressionable, spoiled and looking for meaning in his life, he would have been unaware of his role and required little or no training. Had he been caught prior to boarding the plane, he would have given up little information as he had none to give and he had a father wealthy enough to obtain competent legal defense.

If this was an attempt to find out how much our security has been degraded, what has Al Qaeda learned?

Any large bureaucracy, whether in government or industry, reflects the mindset and policies of the person in charge. In this case Barack Obama. It is apparent to all, terrorism and the nation's security is not taken seriously.

If a terrorist is caught he will be treated as a common criminal and placed in the civil justice system.

There will be no retaliation.

This entire experience will embolden all Islamic terrorist world-wide. Future attacks, some of which will succeed, against the United States are now inevitable.

Alleged isolated extremist pleads 'not guilty'

Ethel C. Fenig
Writing in the National Review Online, Charles Krauthammer observed:

On Wednesday, Nigerian would-be bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was indicted by a Michigan grand jury for attempted murder and sundry other criminal charges. The previous day, the State Department announced that his visa had been revoked. The system worked.Well, it did for Abdulmutallab. What he lost in flying privileges he gained in Miranda rights. He was singing quite freely when seized after trying to bring down Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit. But the Obama administration decided to give him a lawyer and the right to remain silent. We are now forced to purchase information from this attempted terrorist in the coin of leniency. Absurdly, Abdulmutallab is now in control.

His prediction was accurate . Mr. Abdulmutallab, now all lawyered and Miradaed up,

made a brief appearance today in U.S. District Court in Detroit, where he entered a not guilty plea on charges that include using a weapon of mass destruction, according to MSNBC.The hearing lasted minutes as Abdulmutallab indicated he understood the charges and entered his plea.

Will Detroit, which is in even worse financial shape than New York, also have to cough up untold millions in security and lawyers and other expenses so this alleged isolated extremist can get a fair trial to prove to the world what a fair and honest and unbiased country America really is? Will US taxpayers (that's us!) have to pay to listen to his sob story, how he is an innocent victim, lonely and put upon by the mean white Western world which is truly guilty of the almost Christmas Day horror?

In the twisted world of the boundaries of the forthcoming two terror trials, the isolated extremists will not be on trial. We will.

Bombs Don't Take Down Airliners -- People Take Down Airliners

By Scott Boerman

After a refreshing respite, we're now being subjected to a new round of presidential speeches, this time related to the Christmas bomber. The lectures are long on verbal bravado, stern gazes, and the now-clichéd "let me be clear." Surprisingly lacking is the obligatory increased funding or new government entity to fix the problem. The "President's Directive on corrective actions" includes sweeping statements with strong language that directs several organizations to do a better job, which will undoubtedly result in reinforcement and expansion of the current protocols. Unfortunately, the current protocols are misdirected.

Anyone who has flown since 9/11 knows the effects of airline terrorism on airport security -- remove the shoes and belt, laptops in the bin, no liquids, and on and on. Everyone is subjected to these protocols. Businessmen, mothers of toddlers, toddlers themselves, grandmothers, foreigners, citizens -- we all endure the same drill. Most amusing are the "reaction checks." After 9/11, sharp blades were the rage (the rage of airport screeners' scrutiny, that is). After the shoe bomber it was shoes, then it was the 3oz. limit on liquids -- as if 2.5 oz. of liquid is safe, but 3.5 oz. is a threat. Thankfully, the Christmas bomber incident may not result in a new "reaction check," as inspection of the mid-underpants area may not be well-received.

These checks are always too little, too late, like the football defense that covers for the blitz immediately after the blitz occurs. It's a game of cat-and-mouse with a fast, nimble mouse and a leviathan cat. The mouse will eat well today and also tomorrow, when it will simply enter the kitchen through a different hole.

The airport screening that needs to occur is currently off-limits, the casualty of an out-of-control, politically correct mentality. Virtually every air traveler with common sense knows what needs to happen. If all passengers on the Christmas flight had had the opportunity to look around the aircraft or lounge at their fellow travelers to identify anyone who should undergo security scrutiny, I suggest that the bombing attempt would likely have been prevented. Couple that with analysis of the peculiar circumstances of a one-way ticket paid for in cash, with no luggage, and the likelihood of thwarting the attack would multiply. The clear result of political correctness in airline security is an increase in undetected terrorist attacks. In this case, political correctness kills.

The elephant in the room remains. Some call it profiling, but "common sense" seems like a better description. With the application of common sense, every airline terrorist in the last decade would likely have been identified for scrutiny. In engineering, we constantly apply the 80/20 rule. With a little common sense, the 20% of travelers who warrant 80% of the attention could readily be identified and scrutinized accordingly, with little cost or inconvenience.

It's time to stop focusing on egalitarian rules that are blindly applied to all travelers and instead include common sense and discretion in the process. The Caucasian grandmother traveling with a single mom and toddlers may not need a full body pat-down if the metal detector beeps due to a replacement knee. But a young Nigerian male, traveling alone, with a one-way ticket and no luggage -- hmmmm...what do you think? This may be offensive to some, and unfortunately an inconvenience to many innocent foreigners who fly. But airline travel is a privilege, not a right. Anyone who wishes to travel by commercial airline must abide by the rules to participate, just like drivers must acquire a license and follow the rules of the road.

It's time to stop focusing on the tools of terror and redirect our attention to the actors. Bombs and knives certainly do not belong on airplanes, but these objects are not the threat. People are the threat, and it's time to acknowledge that reality. Bombs don't take down airliners -- people take down airliners. Any security efforts that ignore this fact will be in vain.

Bomb suspect faces life

BY BEN SCHMITT and DAVID ASHENFELTER
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS

Terrorism suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab will get his day in court Friday when he is to be arraigned on a six-count federal indictment that could bring him a life-plus prison sentence.The grand jury indictment, filed Wednesday in Detroit, charged the 23-year-old Nigerian national with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction to destroy a Netherlands-to-Detroit jetliner with a homemade bomb sewn into his underwear as it prepared to land Dec. 25.

"This investigation is fast-paced, global and ongoing, and it has already yielded valuable intelligence that we will follow wherever it leads," U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement Wednesday. "Anyone we find responsible for this alleged attack will be brought to justice using every tool -- military or judicial -- available to our government."

There was no immediate comment from the Federal Defender Office in Detroit, which is representing Abdulmutallab.

Abdulmutallab, the son of a wealthy Nigerian banker, is in custody at a federal prison in Milan, near Ann Arbor.
The bomb plot, on Northwest Flight 253, raised security restrictions at airports worldwide and reminded Americans that they still are vulnerable to terror attacks.

Federal prosecutors and court officials in Detroit have been deluged with worldwide media inquiries about Friday's scheduled arraignment.

But for all the buildup, the hearing could turn out to be a routine two-minute court appearance where Abdulmutallab may stand mute to the charges and be quickly hustled by marshals back to the federal prison in Milan, near Ann Arbor. Cameras won't be allowed in the courthouse.

Prosecutors wouldn't be required to present more evidence unless Abdulmutallab's lawyers at the Federal Defender Office request a detention hearing. That's unlikely because Abdulmutallab isn't in the U.S. legally and would immediately be detained by U.S. immigration authorities if a judge released him.

Also unclear is whether there will be a post-arraignment hearing on prosecutors' request to obtain a DNA sample from Abdulmutallab. His lawyers have opposed it, but legal experts have said prosecutors can obtain the evidence through a search warrant.

The Federal Defender Office declined to comment.

"The attempted murder of 289 innocent people merits the most serious charge available, and that's what we have charged in this indictment," U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade of Detroit said Wednesday.

Friday's arraignment is to be conducted by Magistrate Judge Mark Randon. The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds.

The indictment says the 23-year-old Nigerian national tried to kill 279 passengers -- including himself -- and 11 crew members with a weapon of mass destruction on Dec. 25.

"The bomb was designed to allow defendant Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to detonate it at a time of his choosing, and thereby cause an explosion aboard Flight 253," the 7-page indictment said.

The document made no mention of terrorism, but the most serious of the six charges he faces -- attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction -- falls squarely under federal terrorism statutes.

The charge carries a maximum penalty of life in prison. Had anyone died in the bomb plot, the charge could have brought the death penalty.

The other five counts carry maximum penalties ranging from 20-30 years in prison. Two of the counts -- possession of a destructive device in furtherance of a crime of violence -- can add 30-year mandatory consecutive sentences to the weapon of mass destruction count. If convicted, Abdulmutallab could face a life sentence, plus 90 years.

Abdulmutallab was subdued by passengers on the plane after they noticed his pant leg and the side of the plane's cabin were in flames. No passengers or crew were injured in the attack, which resulted in increased airline security worldwide.

When he was arrested, authorities said the bomb consisted of PETN, or pentaerythritol tetranitrate, a colorless, crystalline material that is highly explosive and in the same chemical family as nitroglycerin.

Wednesday's indictment also revealed that the device contained triacetone triperoxide, another high explosive known as TATP. It's one of the most sensitive explosives known and has recently appeared as a popular weapon in the Middle East. It can be easily prepared using commercially available materials, according to a government Web site.

Both explosives were used by Richard Reid, who tried unsuccessfully to detonate a bomb in his shoe aboard a Paris-to-Miami flight in 2001. He is serving a life prison sentence in Colorado.

The indictment is straightforward, said Peter Henning, a Wayne State University law professor and former federal prosecutor.

"This could be a two-week trial, maybe even less," Henning said. "It will not be a complex case."

David Griem, a prominent Detroit criminal lawyer and former federal prosecutor, called the case "the trial that cannot be lost."

"This is a case that my 14-year-old daughter could prosecute," he said after reading the indictment. "We could try this case 100 times, and she'd beat me every time."

Griem said any plea bargain would be tricky, especially with a life-plus offense on the table. "What would the government be willing to offer this guy?" Griem said. "You can't plea-bargain your case away. What message are you sending to terrorists then?"

Dearborn attorney Majed Moughni has helped organize a demonstration, scheduled for Friday in front of the federal court building in Detroit, where Muslim Americans plan to denounce terrorism.

"We want to send a message to these terrorists that you're not welcome in our religion," he said. "We want the world to see our faces. Our goal is to ignite a peaceful protest throughout the Muslim world. We want the world to see what we can do here."

Moughni said he expects thousands from southeast Michigan to attend the protest.

Contact BEN SCHMITT: 313-223-4296 or bcschmitt@freepress.com. Staff writer Todd Spangler contributed to this report.