[tomder55]

Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair testifiying to the Senate has exposed a rift in the administration over the treatment of jihadists.

Blair noted that the administration has created a special team for interrogating high-value terrorism suspects and that it wasn't used -- but should have been -- after the arrest of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian accused of attempting to take down the Northwest Airlines flight traveling from Amsterdam to Detroit.
"That unit was created exactly for this purpose," Blair told the Senate Homeland Security Committee. “We did not invoke the HIG in this case. We should have. Frankly, we were thinking more of overseas people. And, duh ... the decision was made on the scene."
Intelligence director says accused Northwest bomber should have been interrogated by elite team | D.C. Now | Los Angeles Times

The truth is that not only was Blair not consulted ;but neither were Janet Napolitano, DHS, Michael Leiter, chairman of the National Counterterrorism Center;and FBI Director Robert Mueller.Blair testified that they were not intentionally excluded ;but the procedures and processes designed by the Obama administration are so sloppy that effectively there is no process at all. Everything is ad hoc... Duh .

So why wasn't Abdulmutallab interrogated by this new unit created by the Obama am. For expressed purpose of interrogating terrorists ? According to Blair it was because Abdulmutallab had made it into the United States and the unit was only designed to interrogate terrorists overseas . Apparently they never considered the possibility that these terrorists overseas may one day attempt an attack inside the USA ? Duh .
Mueller said the decision to arrest and mirandize him was made by agents on the ground . He testified "In this particular case, in fast-moving events, decisions were made-appropriately, I believe, very appropriately-given the situation." Then he went on to testify that intelligence gathering stopped when Abdulmutallab was told he had the right to remain silent and to an attorney. ........Duh

It doesn't make sense . Abdulmutallab had roasted his chestnuts and was safely being guarded in a hospital. There was no reason for the agents to make the decision.Immediate decisions were not needed . Clearly a decision like that should've been made by someone in a higher position . Did the agents make a mistake ? If the answer is yes ;then why couldn't Eric Holder over-rule the decision and hand him over to the military ,or whoever oversees the interrogation unit. It is still not too late to classify him as an enemy combatant . Are we to believe that this was really a mistake that couldn't be rectified ? Or is it more probable that Holder and Obama agree with the decisions that were made ?

Bill Burck at NRO weighs in

The Justice Department, with the White House's explicit or tacit blessing, has won a major turf battle with the intelligence services. The Obama White House is so committed to the law-enforcement approach to combating terrorism — the very approach that the bipartisan 9/11 Commission said was a major reason the 9/11 plot went undetected until it was too late — that the possibility of interrogating Abdulmutallab to learn whether he had information that could help prevent another attack was seen as, at best, a secondary consideration and, at worst, wholly irrelevant. The war on terror, at least when it comes to threats to the homeland, has been turned over completely to the Justice Department, which is far more focused on punishment and apprehension after the fact than on preventing attacks before they happen .
Who Made the Decision on Abdulmutallab? - Bill Burck - The Corner on National Review Online=

DUH !!!!!

[speechlesstx]

These guys never learn do they? Wasn't the mantra leading up to the presidential election that Bush and his interrogation policies haven't made us safer? I suppose we're now safer because we've returned to treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue. We may all be dead from a terrorist attack but we'll darn sure go out with our values in place and the respect of the world.

[tomder55]

OBL once said that if there is a strong and a weak horse ;the people will be drawn to the strong horse. I am sure that represents the mindset of the average person in the ummah.

[Fr_Chuck]

What ever happened to shooting as spys, enemy agents not in uniform in the others nation. Worked well in WWII

[tomder55]

Fr Chuck... I've used that argument here before. Roosevelt ordered the court martial of 8 German prisoners who infiltrated the borders to commit sabotage . All were convinced according to Roosevelt's instructions and 6 were executed. His decision survived a SCOTUS challenge (Ex parte Quirin) . And of course it was the decision of commanders on the ground to summarily shoot German infiltrators that had donned American uniforms during the Battle of the Bulge.

[galveston]

This whole insanity is based on the humanistic idea that mankind is basically good and that all that is needed is for everyone to be understood and reasoned with. That way, we will all be equal and happy.

Unfortunately, that is not the case.

[Catsmine]

what ever happend to shooting as spys, enemy agents not in uniform in the others nation. Worked well in WWII

I'm still wondering whatever happened to Declarations of War. We get our embassies attacked and captured, our warships bombed, our troops attacked and killed, and we do what, call the FBI?

[tomder55]

But Cats there were 2 clear declarations of war passed by overwhelming majorities of Congress.

I'll link them but remember ,there is no official wording required by the Constitution for such a declaration. However the language in the 2 bills makes it clear that Congress authorized the President to wage war.

Here is the declaration of war against jihadistan.
Authorization for Use of Military Force- Sept. 18, 2001

And here is the delaration of war against Iraq.
http://www.c-span.org/Content/PDF/hjres114.pdf

[Catsmine]

But Cats there were 2 clear declarations of war passed by overwhelming majorities of Congress.

I'll link them but remember ,there is no official wording required by the Constitution for such a declaration. However the language in the 2 bills makes it clear that Congress authorized the President to wage war.

Here is the declaration of war against jihadistan.
Authorization for Use of Military Force- Sept. 18, 2001

and here is the delaration of war against Iraq.
http://www.c-span.org/Content/PDF/hjres114.pdf

I was thinking more of Iran in '79 and Syria in '83 after the barracks was bombed. That is a good point about the wording of such declarations.

[tomder55]

Completely agree about those and other incidents. As the 9-11 report said ;we were at war,we just didn't know it yet.

[tomder55]

Byron York writing for the Washington Examiner notes that questions raised on other posts about the Abdulmutallab arrest here have been asked in the Senate hearings by Sen. Sessions.

"Isn't it a fact, that after Miranda was given ... the individual stopped talking?" Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions asked Mueller

"He did,"

.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/po...#ixzz0dWmHeeEB

The issue is enormously important because Abdulmutallab, newly trained by al Qaeda in the terrorist group's latest hot spot, Yemen, likely knows things that would be very useful to American anti-terrorism investigators. He's not some grizzled old terrorist who's been sitting in Guantanamo Bay since 2003 and doesn't have any new intelligence. He's fresh material. Yet he is protected by U.S. criminal law from having to answer questions.
Why? Republicans on the Judiciary Committee increasingly believe there is only one person who can answer: Attorney General Eric Holder.
It was Holder who made the decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a criminal trial in New York. It is Holder who has expressed his desire to grant full American constitutional rights to foreign terrorists. It is Holder who is leading the administration's sputtering effort to move some Guantanamo inmates to the United States. And it is Holder who is apparently cutting other parts of the government out of crucial terrorism decisions like the treatment of Abdulmutallab.
"These days, all roads lead to the attorney general," says one well-placed Republican source in the Senate. "They seem to have aggregated quite a bit of power inside Main Justice." The problem is, the Holder Justice Department appears to be handling terrorism issues from a defense-attorney perspective, and doing so without the input of the government's other terrorism-fighting agencies.

Even the Washington Compost is now questioning the decision .

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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...012204349.html

[Catsmine]

Byron York writing for the Washington Examiner notes that questions raised on other posts about the Abdulmutallab arrest here have been asked in the Senate hearings by Sen. Sessions.

.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/po...#ixzz0dWmHeeEB

Even the Washington Compost is now questioning the decision .

washingtonpost.com
[/LEFT]

This goes back to the Declaration vs. Authorization for war. Apparently the new Administration is looking for another new definition of "is." They simply cannot see this as a war, it's simply more Clinton-defined criminality.

[speechlesstx]

More on the Obama administration's law and order approach to terrorism. Seems Obama has caved on holding the KSM et al trial in NY as you've probably heard, but is still hedging on whether it will be a civilian or military trial (which could be interesting because didn't they drop the military charges?).

One thing they haven't changed since deciding to try them in NY is their presumption of guilt. Obama pretty much guaranteed a conviction and execution back then, and Gibbs is doing so now.

"He will be brought to justice and he is likely be executed for the heinous crimes he has committed in masterminding the killing of 3,000 Americans," he told on CNN's "State of the Union." "That you can be sure of."

What's the point of trying to show how just and righteous America is once again under Obama if they keep guaranteeing the outcome?

[tomder55]

Also it was revealed this weekend that the FBI only questioned Abdulmutallab for 50 minutes before Mirandizing him.
Weekly remarks: GOP's Susan Collins asks, why stop interrogating a terrorist? Obama says economy grows | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times

[speechlesstx]

And don't you know it really chaps some a$$es for the Bush lawyers being cleared for the "torture memos" during all of this?