Even the Washington Post has come out in opposition to the Obama administration’s decision to treat the crotch-bomber (Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab) as nothing more than a common street criminal:
Whether to charge terrorism suspects or hold and interrogate them is a judgment call. We originally supported the administration’s decision in the Abdulmutallab case, assuming that it had been made after due consideration. But the decision to try Mr. Abdulmutallab turns out to have resulted not from a deliberative process but as a knee-jerk default to a crime-and-punishment model.
~~~…Some intelligence officials, including personnel from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, were included in briefings by the Justice Department before Mr. Abdulmutallab was charged. These sessions did provide an opportunity for those attending to debate the merits of detention vs. prosecution. According to sources with knowledge of the discussions, no one questioned the approach or raised the possibility of taking more time to question the suspect. This makes the administration’s approach even more worrisome than it would have been had intelligence personnel been cut out of the process altogether.
The fight against an unconventional enemy such as al-Qaeda cannot be waged exclusively or effectively through any single approach. Just as it would be a mistake to view all terrorist acts as law enforcement challenges, so would it be unwise to deal with all such incidents as acts of war. All paths must be seriously considered before a determination is made.
I cannot for the life of me fathom how anyone could believe giving Miranda warnings to a terrorist is a good idea. Yes, I know the left has many rabid peaceniks who are more naive than a 5 year old but come on…..Miranda warnings for a foreign terrorist suspect? He is not a US citizen and he was trained by and is a part of a non-state entity which has declared war on us. He simply does not have the same protection afforded to a US citizen. He is an enemy combatant. No Miranda warnings are necessary. (see Aye’s excellent commentary for more)
But lets say the administration believes the warnings are necessary to get a conviction. Fine….but should the first goal be to get a conviction?
I mean what do we want to question him about? Myself, I would want to know the what, where, when, how and why on his training and what further plans our enemy has in store for us. Who cares if we can’t use that information in court against him? We are talking about protecting our country. The eyewitness accounts and huge amount of evidence collected is plenty for a good prosecution team to convict the scumbag but a conviction SHOULD NOT be the President’s goal. Getting the information needed to protect our shores against further attacks should be goal numero uno.
Bill Otis, a former federal prosecutor, nails Obama hard:
What the Post still fails to understand is that the administration’s “myopic, irresponsible and potentially dangerous” blunder in this case was less a result of one bureaucratic miscommunication than of the inherent confusion at the base of its thinking about terrorism and the law. As long as there is indecision about whether violent jihadists should be treated as standard criminals or as the illegal combatants they are, blunders like this are inevitable. The administration’s policy is not the nuanced approach the Post takes it to be. It is wishful thinking masquerading as a nuanced approach.
It’s obvious that Obama cares only about how he is viewed, how well liked he can be, in doing his job rather than just doing the job right. That job’s biggest purpose is to protect the homeland. He neither made himself better liked nor protected our country in this case and I’m afraid he will do worse over the next few years.
See author page
The left, ie, Obama, do not see threats to the United States as threats. They only see threats to themselves and their political power. They do not act to protect this nation as a whole and value “words” more than action.
They’re all about process and procedure. University thinking. Not practical on the ground, get results action. They do not regret when lives are lost due to their dithering as they are above the bitter-clinging-chaff… and if a few of the little folks get killed, well,…. so be it..
“It’s 3 AM….”
It gets much, much worse than this (and all the other foolish misteps of Obama’s insane clown posse). Try this:
“White House lawyers are mulling the legality of proposed attempts to kill an American citizen, Anwar al Awlaki, who is believed to be part of the leadership of the al Qaeda group in Yemen behind a series of terror strikes, according to two people briefed by U.S. intelligence officials. ”
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-mulls-legality-killing-american-al-qaeda-turncoat/story?id=9651830
Where to start? First of all, White House lawyers? This is a DoD and maybe a DoJ question. The White House has NOTHING to do with this. Of course, targeting an American traitor actively working with our enemies is an excellent idea when you are at war. At peace, you try to extradite them. Maybe the posse is going to try for extradition. Or just letting more people die because of their desire to protect the world against the ravages of the American War Machine ™.
GD American indeed!
iconoclast, if it were left entirely to DOD, Anwar al Awlaki would be at room temperature or in custody. This is not a DOJ issue at face value. WH Lawyers and Mr. Eric Holder are the obstacles here and the Boy Wonder in the Oval Office takes the counsel of Fools.
Greater concern for Obama’s vision of the Nation’s Image rather than getting to the source of the FT. Hood Shooter and the Panty Bombers mentorship is what this is all about. An unshackled CIA and DOD could have this problem solved. Obama could care less about the sovereignty of Pakistan or Yemen in using missile armed drones. Why should a few temporary boot prints in the sand to apprehend al Awlaki matter? The Saudi’s don’t care. Qatar would not care. As I distinctly recall
one of the objectives of Operation Just Cause was the arrest of Noriega. That was accomplished.
This White House has a very confused and misplaced set of perspectives.
As much as I agree with the incompetence of this administration, I think this is a bureaucratic foul up. When the FBI agents were sent to handle the Christmas day case they reacted the way they have been trained and questioned the suspect and then Mirandized him. This would be normal procedure for a typical bank robber or child molester. This admin is so far behind the curve of filling vacancies that they don’t have any of the HIG team in place. Plus, these bright lights at the FBI didn’t think to call in and ask if this bombing case might rise to a higher level. It’s really not the agents fault because they have been so brain washed about civil rights and sensitivity training that this is the results. Remember the Moussaoui case, the 19th hijackers in 911? The FBI wanted to look at his laptop to see if he had any info that might help them BEFORE the 911 attack but were denied by their higher ups. That is bureaucracy at its worst.
@iconoclast: of course the White House is at the center of these decisions. Obama has politicized ALL national security moves in the war on terror.
He’s acting through Eric Holder, one of the most political Attorney Generals of all time.