Coop's Corner
February 3, 2010 8:15 PM

The Abdulmutallab Guessing Game

By
Charles Cooper
Topics
In The News
Should the U.S. have treated Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab like a regular street criminal and read him his Miranda rights? Or put the screws to him until he began singing like a canary?

It's an important debate. No doubt the Justice Department was in a tizzy when it decided - without first consulting with senior intelligence officials - how to proceed after the Christmas Day bomber's apprehension. The director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair even wondered publicly in Senate testimony whether this was the smart move.

Also Read: White House Damage Control: Politics or Policy?

There's an argument to be made that the delay denied the U.S. intelligence about al Qaeda that we otherwise would have retrieved through interrogations. (Former CIA Director, Gen. Michael Hayden argued as much recently in a critique he published in the Washington Post.) But the White House has since put out word that with the help of a couple of Abdulmutallab's Nigerian relatives who flew back to the U.S with interrogators, leaked Abdulmutallab "has been cooperating for days." Of course, in Washington's uber-politicized atmosphere, good news means bad news and the White House leak has only intensified the ire of the Obama (and Eric Holder) critics.

In the Washington Independent, Byron York complained about the "political context" in which the news was being reported and hinted darkly at a White House conspiracy to cover up - well, something. At National Review, the prolific duo of former Bush officials Dana Perino and Bill Burcke used the occasion to bash the administration for ending the "CIA interrogation program disbanded by President Obama." (They're too delicate to get into the details but they're talking about practices like waterboarding, head slapping and sleep deprivation. For the record, this is the same Dana Perino who said last November that "we did not have a terrorist attack during President Bush's first term.")

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey spoke for many on the right in expressing his skepticism of the White House's commitment to protecting the common weal.(This one deserves quotation in length.)

"There are two possibilities in this scenario. The first is that the administration got Abdulmutallab's family to the US immediately after the terrorist clammed up, and that he had been giving valuable intel all along. That would mean that the White House sent Gibbs on a misinformation mission — which under the circumstances would be acceptable as a way to keep Abdulmutallab's contacts relaxed and in position for American attempts to target them.

"But if that was the case, why leak its effectiveness now? The US hasn't conducted any known raids in Yemen for the last few weeks. This leak will certainly tip off any of Abdulmutallab's cohorts to start looking for new ground and to disconnect any network nodes of which the EunuchBomber had knowledge.

"The second scenario would be that the White House finally acted after getting ripped by both Democrats and Republicans for their mishandling of the terrorist and the unilateral decision to keep him in the criminal system. That would explain the testimony of Mueller, Blair, Napolitano, and Leiter in front of Congress — where deliberately giving false testimony is a crime, not a misdirection strategy. Under this scenario, the administration finally got Abdulmutallab to talk by getting his family involved, but weeks too late to have anything helpful in stopping any other potential terrorist attacks.

"Given this administration's track record and the previous testimony to Congress, the second scenario seems significantly more likely."

His assumption is that U.S. intelligence would have extracted a trove of actionable information that it might have later used to disrupt terror plots. Is Abdulmutallab as knowledgeable as all that? But it's only a guess, one that's more informed by predictable partisanship than by a sober analysis of the facts on the ground.

  • Charles Cooper is an executive editor at CNET News. He has covered technology and business for more than 25 years, working at CBSNews.com, the Associated Press, Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. E-mail Charlie.

Add a Comment
by amacd385 February 5, 2010 5:49 PM EST
What lies and deceptive BS from this arrogant and murderous EMPIRE that controls our country!!.

The ?Christmas Bomber? was ALLOWED into the US precisely by 'our own' US intelligence services, regardless of the possibility that he would kill US passengers!

Why isn't the Post, NYT, Globe and other MSM reporting this truth:

This was a spooky ploy, and NO media other than WSWS is saying boo about the truth behind the facade.

"A January 27 hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security established that US intelligence agencies stopped the State Department from revoking the US visa of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. The Nigerian student, whom US officials suspected of being affiliated with the Yemeni terrorist group Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, attempted to set off a bomb on Northwest Flight 253 into Detroit on Christmas Day. Revocation of Abdulmutallab?s visa would have prevented him from boarding the airplane."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/f253-f03.shtml

The MSM should be ashamed of not reporting this.

Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine


"The revelation that US intelligence agencies made a deliberate decision to allow Abdulmutallab to board the commercial flight, without any special airport screening, has been buried in the media. As of this writing, nearly a week after the hearing, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times have published no articles on the subject. Nor have the broadcast or cable media reported on it."

"Under questioning by the committee chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, Kennedy [State Dept Under Sect.] explained why the State Department might not revoke the US visa of a suspected terrorist: ?We will revoke the visa of any individual who is a threat to the United States, but we do take one preliminary step. We ask our law enforcement and intelligence community partners, ?Do you have eyes on this person and do you want us to let this person proceed under your surveillance so that you may potentially break a larger plot???

He added: ?And one of the members [of the intelligence community]?and we?d be glad to give you that out of [open session]?in private?said, ?Please, do not revoke this visa. We have eyes on this person. We are following this person who has the visa for the purpose of trying to roll up an entire network, not just stop one person.??
Reply to this comment
by republicanblack February 5, 2010 12:02 AM EST
I think that this criminal should be tried in court and not in a tribunal. At first I supported a tribunal and thought obama was wrong but after seeing this article I could understand why these terrorists have no place in a tribunal:

http://******/aTWT71
Reply to this comment
by amacd385 February 4, 2010 10:59 AM EST
Christmas Bomber was allowed into the US by US intelligence services, regardless of the possibility that he would kill US passengers!

Why isn't the Post, NYT, and other MSM reporting this truth:

This was a spooky ploy, and NO media other than WSWS is saying boo about the truth behind the facade.

"A January 27 hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security established that US intelligence agencies stopped the State Department from revoking the US visa of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. The Nigerian student, whom US officials suspected of being affiliated with the Yemeni terrorist group Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, attempted to set off a bomb on Northwest Flight 253 into Detroit on Christmas Day. Revocation of Abdulmutallab?s visa would have prevented him from boarding the airplane."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/f253-f03.shtml

The MSM should be ashamed of not reporting this.

Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine

This link is the complete link to WSWS report.

"The revelation that US intelligence agencies made a deliberate decision to allow Abdulmutallab to board the commercial flight, without any special airport screening, has been buried in the media. As of this writing, nearly a week after the hearing, the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times have published no articles on the subject. Nor have the broadcast or cable media reported on it."

"Under questioning by the committee chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, Kennedy [State Dept Under Sect.] explained why the State Department might not revoke the US visa of a suspected terrorist: ?We will revoke the visa of any individual who is a threat to the United States, but we do take one preliminary step. We ask our law enforcement and intelligence community partners, ?Do you have eyes on this person and do you want us to let this person proceed under your surveillance so that you may potentially break a larger plot???

He added: ?And one of the members [of the intelligence community]?and we?d be glad to give you that out of [open session]?in private?said, ?Please, do not revoke this visa. We have eyes on this person. We are following this person who has the visa for the purpose of trying to roll up an entire network, not just stop one person.??
Reply to this comment
by soap-suds February 4, 2010 10:37 AM EST
When is it going to become totally, absolutely obvious that whatever is done there is going to be an artificial uproar. If something diametrically opposite is done one minute later, there is going to be an artificial uproar. There is going to be a group of "no" votes in Congress regardless of the subject. Lack of facts is no problem. Modified facts is no problem. History is no problem.
Reply to this comment
by jimbom121 February 4, 2010 10:23 AM EST
Why is this such a big deal? The Bush administration tried 300 suspected terrorists in US Civil court and only 3 in Military Tribunals. If you look closely, there are very little differences between the 2.
Reply to this comment
by anagheel February 4, 2010 8:17 AM EST
what really troubles me is that elected members of congress are acting so stupid that they are jeopardizing ongoing activities around the world against real enemies that care less about republican,democrat or neither americans.there is areason we have laws and federal courts.we dont have them in other nations therefore military action is a must overseas operations.at home!we use highly skilled individuals to fight and defeat the enemies within our borders and they are called FEDERAL LAW ENFORCMENT AGENTS.by the way those who r screaming 4 military investigating in our home front wars i got a Q do u know that the military is part of the FEDS IN THE GOV?jesus !they talk as if we r ignorant 2 score political points. they dont even see the damage they r causing 2 our 1st line of defense at home.they r men&women who work without complaint every day&night and hearing this fools!!oh plzzzzzzzzzz,save the stupidity 2 yourselfs
Reply to this comment
by wdh3007 February 3, 2010 10:52 PM EST
Ask yourself this question how come we don't hear about the flying dutchman who attacked the underwear bomber and stoped the Christmas attack. How come he was never on any major news sources or even intervied once? How come he was never awarded a presidential medal of freedom for his brave actions? Answer becuase the media does not want to admit that the government under Obama and his minions failed us and can't protect the American people from an attack by radical islam so we have to protect and defend ourselves in any way we can.
Reply to this comment
by jgg000101 February 3, 2010 10:57 PM EST
I'm still asking myself why obama didn't introduce the shooter of Col. Hassan at FT. Hood who was sitting next to michelle during the SOTU.
by cougherss February 3, 2010 10:09 PM EST
Holder wrote to Mitch McConell in a letter that "the FBI told its partners in the intelligence community on Christmas Day that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab would be charged criminally." This is not true. 3 Intelligence heads told Susan Collins at the Senate Judiciary hearing that they were not consulted over the matter.

http://obamareport.blogspot.com/2010/02/eric-holder-dangerous-prevaricator.html

Why isn't the Mainstream media reporting this?
Reply to this comment
by wfw3536 February 3, 2010 10:04 PM EST
This is another example of how incompetent Obama's administration is and how out of touch they are when you give someone like this all the rights of an American citizen. Now after two week they say he is talking, well what about all of the information they could have or how it important it might have been if they had not given him all of his rights as if he was a US citizen when he was caught. It is clear the administration is now trying to cover up their mistake. We could start by firing the Attorney General.
Reply to this comment
.

Follow Coop's Corner

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook