Security review contradicts media on who subdued Abdulmutallab--one of several shockers

Analysis by Kay B. Day

How did media miss a glaring contradiction in the written report featured on The White House website?

President Barack Obama made remarks about the Security Review related to the Christmas Day bomb attempt on Flight 253, repeating the phrase ‘systemic failure’ and acknowledging the buck stops in the Oval Office. The White House also posted a summary of the security review online. For that action, we should all commend the president.

As he spoke, the president was on his mark, poised and articulate. Referring to the War on Terror as a war against al Qaeda, Obama said, “We will do whatever it takes to defeat them.” Later he added, “Al Qaeda offers nothing but a bankrupt vision of misery and death.”

The hard stuff, however, is in the text of the online summary. The text opens with an account of the sequence of events aboard Flight 253 when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to set off a bomb hidden next to his private parts in his underwear. There’s a shocker of sorts in the top box:
“The device did not explode, but instead ignited, injuring Mr. Abdulmutallab and two other passengers. The flight crew restrained Mr. Abdulmutallab and the plane safely landed.”

CONTRADICTIONS, LACK OF ACTION
That statement is at odds with claims widely reported by media. For instance, MSNBC, regarded by most as pro-administration/Democrat, reported on Dec. 28, “No undercover air marshal was on board and passengers subdued the suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, of Nigeria.”

The White House report also said the U.S. Government “had sufficient information prior to the attempted December 25 attack to have potentially disrupted the AQAP [al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula] plot—i.e., by identifying Mr. Abdulmutallab as a likely operative of AQAP and potentially preventing him from boarding flight 253.”

One reporter, in the followup session with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, asked about the large Arab American population in Detroit and possible connections to the terrorist’s destination.

Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano responded, “DHS has had outreach efforts into different outreach populations…we’re trying to build bridges…we need to look at strengthening those activities and look at counter-radicalization.” Napolitano said we need to “get into the process” before somebody is radicalized. That statement is not going to reassure jittery Americans. Just as no one could have rehabilitated Adolf Hitler, we are likely not going to be able to rehabilitate or intervene with Al Qaeda recruits.

The terrorist organization has built a culture of death—our own president acknowledged that.

Overall, the near catastrophe averted on Christmas Day for those aboard Flight 253 was indeed “a failure to connect the dots.” But obviously, the greatest federal breakdown was a failure to act on the intelligence we had on hand. Abdulmutallab’s name was misspelled on some documents, but if we can’t solve a spelling challenge we are in even bigger trouble than we think.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU NEUTER THE CIA?
We must also acknowledge the attempted attack is a consequence of neutering the Central Intelligence Agency and of political attacks on that organization. Mention the CIA and leftwingers have intellectual spasms. Little attribute is given when a CIA officer is killed. The only time leftwingers love the CIA is when they accuse a conservative of outing an alleged agent.

We just lost what many analysts considered some top agents in the CIA in a bombing at an outpost in Afghanistan. Many are asking what kind of security protocols were in place.

What's strange about leftwing crits of the CIA is that a Democrat president was largely responsible for cranking the organization up. Perhaps the best account of this organization's relationship with our government can be found in an intriguing feature at Commentary Magazine [The 35-year war against the CIA by Arthur Herman/Dec. 2009].

TRIAL LAWYERS AND RELIGIOUS FANATICS
It's useful to recall successful lawsuit threats by individuals like the “Flying Imams” who frightened passengers by praying loudly and criticizing U.S. policy, yet somehow walked away from a settlement, presumably with a wad of cash to rectify their civil rights. The judge who presided over the case should’ve tossed it out on the curb. Instead she managed to schedule a conference and only the lawyers know how much money the imams got for their day of fun at passengers’ expense.

Had those imams been proselytizing Christians, they’d have been kicked off the flight and probably incarcerated. Imagine this—you’re on a plane and suddenly some Pentecostal type starts praying in a loud voice and condemning leftwingers. There are six of these loudmouths, and some of them asked for seatbelt extensions although they weren’t obese. Others had only purchased one-way tickets. All of them looked like rightwing Southerners. Just imagine that scenario for a moment.

You think these energetic Christians would get big bucks for their civil rights even though, by the Flying Imam standard, their rights would be infringed?

THOUGHTS ON GOAT DUNG AND THE UN
A veil of political correctness bordering insanity covers the eyes of our nation at present. Early on when the new administration took office, Obama sought a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, a direct contrast to the stance of President George W. Bush. The Council passed a resolution ‘Combating Defamation of Religions.’ [Resolution 7/19]. The resolution specifically condemned “the growing trend of Islamophobia.” But the aim was portrayed as protection for religions in general.

For the record here is a breakdown of how many times protective language in the UN resolution applied to a particular faith:
•Islam, Muslim, Arab—13
•Jew or Judaism—0
•Christian—0
•Catholic—0
•Buddhism—0
•Hinduism—0
•Wicca—0

In Washington on Thursday during Gibbs’ post-wrap, Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan responded to a reporter’s question about the religion factor in terrorist acts. He said Al Qaeda is “using the banner of religion in a very perverse and corrupt way.”

I’d add in a very widespread way to that statement. And I’d also make note there is very little outcry from that faith as a whole when terrorist acts occur—that may possibly be a product of fear, I admit. Fox News said moderate Muslims plan to protest violence at the courthouse in Detroit where Abdulmutallab was to appear on Friday.

Meanwhile, it’s hard to be an American these days and feel like there isn’t a target on our back. We are at the moment hated, for our freedom, our faiths and our culture. We are especially hated for our entertainment industry.

If the UN Human Rights Council was worth a pinch of goat dung, you’d think that group would come up with a resolution decrying the growing trend of “Ameri-phobia.”

IMPACT OF VISAS, IMMIGRANTS FROM HOSTILE COUNTRIES
You’d also think we’d be smart enough to more carefully screen visitors and even wannabe-immigrants who travel from countries where terrorists congregate. I’d say the president should think hard about seriously slowing down anyone who wants to come here from a country whose leaders express anti-American sentiment. And if we can't get a grip on the visa process, we should pick up a broom and do some serious self-flagellation.

That a country as great as the U.S. cannot “connect the dots” as the president and others said of the Christmas Day attack should shock us. Our country has had two attacks on the Mainland in less than 4 months, one successful (Ft. Hood) and one a failure. Not connecting future dots is definitely not an option.

Above all, not acting on the intel we have in hand is akin to reading a magazine as you watch your house burn.

We are sleeping again, even as the alarm sounds.

THE GREAT WHODUNNIT
Meanwhile, who really did subdue the Nigerian terrorist wannabe in what our president called a “systemic failure” on Flight 253? Only the passengers know for sure.