US offering EunuchBomber a deal?

posted at 2:35 pm on January 3, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The video below of John Brennan is Politico’s survey of his quotes on today’s morning political talk shows, but none of them address the interesting quote highlighted in the article. Critics howled when the DoJ decided to handle Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in the criminal justice system rather than by the military, arguing that Abdulmutallab should have been interrogated for intelligence. Now Brennan suggests they’ll cut a deal with the terrorist to get what they may have gotten for free otherwise (via Geoff A):

The U.S. Government is offering the suspect charged with attempting to bomb an aircraft on Christmas Day, Omar Abdulmutallab, some kind of incentives to share what he knows about Al Qaeda, White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said Sunday.

Asked why Abdulmutallab should cooperate given his right, as criminal defendant, to remain silent, Brennan replied: “He doesn’t have to but he knows there are certain things that are on the table… if he wants to engage with us in a productive manner, there are ways he can do that.”

Instead of grilling Abdulmutallab as an unlawful combatant member of al-Qaeda, the US now has to offer plea deals in the criminal justice system to get him to talk. Is this “smart power,” or is it a foolish obstinacy that prevents the proper approach to national security? After all, no one doubts that Abdulmutallab joined AQ, a foreign enemy of the United States. If the US thought otherwise, there wouldn’t be any reason to offer a deal at all. Instead of having military and intelligence counterterrorism experts do the interrogation, we’re reduced to playing Law and Order with a foreign terrorist who just missed killing hundreds of people.

This approach will hardly strike fear into the hearts of would-be terrorists.

The video has some interesting moments, including Brennan’s insistence that we have to close Gitmo because AQ uses it for propaganda purposes. Contrast that with Eric Holder’s earlier statement that he wouldn’t let terrorists dictate whether we try them in the military or civil system. Isn’t caving to AQ’s propaganda merely to exchange a explicitly-designed terrorist detention center for a makeshift one in Illinois the same thing?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

There were no terrorists before gitmo
Just ask Khalidi.

macncheez on January 3, 2010 at 4:19 PM

Yes, because when we took GITMO away from the Cubans… and Teddy Roosevelt made them sign the treaty in 1903… Cubans being of Spanish descent, and since Islam still wants Spain back…

See… its all our fault! We antagonized them by taking Moslem land!

Romeo13 on January 3, 2010 at 4:27 PM

Remember when this attitude and approach to “countering” terrorism was the European way? Reacting, appeasing, making trades, etc. It was generally disdained by Americans and thought very shortsighted. I guess BO is more enlightened now…

yubley on January 3, 2010 at 4:32 PM

The same Brennan who was warned by the Saudi about the the wiener bomber.

bayview on January 3, 2010 at 4:40 PM

Bargaining for something we could get for free reflects Obama’s instinct to reward free-loaders.

GaltBlvnAtty on January 3, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Here’s the deal, Sparky. You tell me what I want to know, and I’ll take that hungry ferret out your ass and put a bullet through your brain.

Too much?

Doorgunner on January 3, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Nah. But then again, I like Vince Flynn novels.

Colorado Anne on January 3, 2010 at 4:42 PM

This is nuts.
Why would a deal be offered at this stage or any stage? Why would anything that would come out of this brainwash psychopaths mouth be believed?

Itchee Dryback on January 3, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Welcome back to the law enforcement model of fighting a war. It’s not like they’re offering a deal to a low level mob footman in order to get the RICO evidence on the boss. This guy is a combatant and his bosses are in Yemen and elsewhere. He should be being sweated in Gitmo, not cutting deals with DOJ for easy time.

jnelchef on January 3, 2010 at 4:57 PM

Who’s afraid of due process?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 3, 2010 at 4:59 PM

What’s next? $3 million deposited in a numbered Swiss account and another “health related” release for humanitarian reasons like the Lockerbie bomber got?

DANEgerus on January 3, 2010 at 5:11 PM

“Deep Breath”…….to quote Kathleen Parker

elclynn on January 3, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Sick! Just … sick!

OldEnglish on January 3, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Is Obama going to toss Israel into the sea because Al Queda uses Israel’s existence for propaganda and recruitment purposes? What’s the difference between closing GITMO because it’s a negative with Al Queda and abandoning Israel because of the same reason? Are these trick questions?

I’m sure the democraps are pleased that we now have to coddle the undies bomber because he’s lawyered up. Perhaps as part of the deal we could arrange that he goes to Saudi Arabia for art therapy and relationship counseling?
As it is, it is looking like Obama is doubling down on his insane policy of treating enemy combatants as if they were criminal defendants. If any more undies bombers get through within the next half year, the Obama Administration will have hell to pay, because of this decision to criminalize this enemy combatant before he spit up info.
In fact it calls to mind Holder’s assertion that we would lawyer up Osama Bin Laden because there would be nothing we needed to know from any potential interrogation of him, that would be necessary to get a conviction in the criminal courts of the USA. Of course sane Americans (that leaves out 90 percent of the Obama Administration) might want to know about little things like who is in the organization and what plans are in operation, but since those ‘aren’t necessary for conviction’, why bother with interrogations. Why, that might make it sound like there was a… a…. a… war on terror? And we know that such war never existed, it was just a Bushitlerhalliburton lie.

eaglewingz08 on January 3, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Just words, my friends. Just words. That’s all we’ll ever get from this administration until they are voted out of office. And that will happen much sooner than they hoped.

EMD on January 3, 2010 at 5:26 PM

If, as Brennan claims, he has served in security postions in multiple administrations, then maybe Brennan deserves closer scrutiny as a leaker and underminer in the Bush administration.

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:30 PM

Terrorism emanating from Yemen began well before the opening of Gitmo to house enemy combatants. How stupid is Brennan?

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:34 PM

Brennan is a very strange spokesman. Inspires confidence? Not. Why do this now if you are the administration? Panic.

chaswv on January 3, 2010 at 5:36 PM

Falling for anything.

Brennan blames our/his liberal, above winning, attitude, and utterly pathetic logistical competence on the enemy and those mean right wingers.

More reality bites, steep learning curve, pain to follow.

Egos are very expensive, guess who pays?

Speakup on January 3, 2010 at 5:36 PM

It’s only the Nutroots on the Far Left who want to close Gitmo. America otherwise is coming together in its anger that this wannabe terrorist funded and trained by AlQaeda is being treated like a criminal, not a terrorist.

The ObaMao administation is underestimating the dissatisfaction of the country.

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:44 PM

This is a real good time for a SP op- ed.

It’s not good for this bunch if it, on the less noxious point, cost millions and millions to prosecute.

Going to the next level of public farce from enemies of our country and ultimately the fact that execution is a pipe dream, but a plea deal?

We need his story to support killing those involved with the plotting?

No leader has dragged their feet so in the middle of a war

it’s repugnant!

Sonosam on January 3, 2010 at 5:45 PM

It’s not good if it doesn’t cost millions….

Sonosam on January 3, 2010 at 5:47 PM

The ObaMao administation is underestimating the dissatisfaction of the country.

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:44 PM

They’ve made a political calculation based on the idea that the Average American now has a very short attention span.

Couple that with the current bias of the MSM, and the ever accelerating news cycle (where there is no in depth reporting, just regurgitation of the same “facts” over and over)…

And they believe that they can wait out any dissent.

After all, its worked with ACORN, who is now getting Federal Funds again… it worked with Fannie May and Freddie Mac, who were part of the cause of the housing bubble, and just got UNLIMITED credit lines from the Federal Government….

Could go on and on… but I think you get their strategy…

Romeo13 on January 3, 2010 at 5:49 PM

With this kind of attitude coming from those close to the President, or in his administration, and even from Obama himself….look for more attacks in the near future.

AQ, the Taliban, and terrorists around the world now know, Obama is weak, and we aren’t taking anything they do….seroiusly.

Duck, and COVER!!!

capejasmine on January 3, 2010 at 3:26 PM

Hezbollah has been training jihadists in South America for some time, teaching them to speak Spanish, in order for more terrorists to penetrate our porous southern border.

Once a signal is given to all of the embedded sleeper cells in our country, chaos and flames could simultaneously envelop our densely populated urban areas.

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:49 PM

Is Obama going to toss Israel into the sea because Al Queda uses Israel’s existence for propaganda and recruitment purposes?

He is already doing just that.

What’s the difference between closing GITMO because it’s a negative with Al Queda and abandoning Israel because of the same reason?

There isn’t any. Either way, it’s a preemptive surrender to the terrorists.

Are these trick questions?

Depends… are you being tricky?

n0doz on January 3, 2010 at 5:58 PM

See… its all our fault! We antagonized them by taking Moslem land!
Romeo13 on January 3, 2010 at 4:27 PM

Romeo13, your review of Gitmo’s historical precedents is truly unprecedented! Are there plans to open a “Research Methods for Journalists” school in your future?

ya2daup on January 3, 2010 at 6:31 PM

This approach will hardly strike fear into the hearts of would-be terrorists.

the paper tiger has returned

cmsinaz on January 3, 2010 at 6:34 PM

they know exactly how to play dear leader…ugh

cmsinaz on January 3, 2010 at 6:35 PM

I heard the deal they’ve offered him is called the “Crotchbomber Compromise” – tell us what you know and we’ll pay your increased MediCare fees forever.

PatMac on January 3, 2010 at 6:55 PM

I fear for the free world.

jukin on January 3, 2010 at 7:02 PM

“He doesn’t have to but he knows there are certain things that are on the table… if he wants to engage with us in a productive manner, there are ways he can do that.”

shall we ask him more nicely…?
what if he has the knowledge of other plots, other undiebombers and planners? What if those plots go undetected and people are killed?

we have a guy in custody, who may possess valuable information that, if not accessed by this White House, may lead to Americans getting hurt/killed.

Yes, just keep on asking “more nicely”….. maybe with sugar on it next time and then cross your fingers and simply hope its not your family member on the next Detroit bound aircraft with a panty bomber on board.

ted c on January 3, 2010 at 7:07 PM

The video has some interesting moments, including Brennan’s insistence that we have to close Gitmo because AQ uses it for propaganda purposes.

The reality is that AQ will make propaganda over the detainees whether in Gitmo or in the sweetheart deal the administration made to rid Ill. with a surplus prison and provide jobs to a region beneficial to the Chicago political mafia. Bennan is as much a filthy lying coward as Barak Hussein Obama.

highhopes on January 3, 2010 at 7:10 PM

First, cut off his left pinkie. Then bring him back the next day to answer questions. This could go on for twenty days, I know, but it probably wouldn’t.

Akzed on January 3, 2010 at 7:15 PM

This could go on for twenty days, I know, but it probably wouldn’t.

Akzed on January 3, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Longer than that. You’d want to throw in a few days where nothing at all happened just to mess with his mind.

highhopes on January 3, 2010 at 7:17 PM

In other news, John Kerry’s visit to “warm” relations with Iran, Ack-my-dumb-jihad chose to spit in his face(as well as all of ours)by rejecting Sen Kerry’s entry visa!

Hey, at least they know the main benefit of tight border control–keep out the riffraff

Chris_Balsz on January 3, 2010 at 7:19 PM

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 5:49 PM

That’s a good point, America has seen nothing yet with these handful of terrorists. If our administration lacks the common sense to even treat them like enemy combatants, how will they handle thing when the trickle of jihadists turns into a tidal wave? Perhaps like Europe which is ignoring the thousands of muslims roaming their streets like rabid hyenas, harassing, beating up, raping and killing their citizens, destroying property and burning thousands of cars (like in France), threatening to kill politicians in Britain, while no one says a word and the media fails to report it all?

There’s not only Al Qaeda and Hezbollah sleeper cells in the US but I’ve also read that Iran’s regime has many of their own cells embedded here as well. Of course the biggest cells aren’t sleeping, they are openly active and in plain sight-the ordinary mosques ready to join the jihad when they get the signal. If anyone has seen some of the mass pro Hamas marches/demonstrations, in Florida New York for instance, they’d realize how serious the situation really is. While I’m at it here’s some other videos really worth seeing:

Arab Fest-Sharia in USA
Global Jihad
Geert Wilders wake up call
What muslims say about us

Their goal is to exact mass western casualties, the destruction of our freedom/democracy, the conversion, subjugation or death of all non-muslims and the establishment of Islamic rule, not just in America but the world. Every conflict in the world which involves muslims is motivated by this goal. The engine of their terrorism is Islam, people only need to open a Quran (and Hadiths) to understand that…or just see what the muslims are saying and doing.

thinkagain on January 3, 2010 at 7:21 PM

“US offering EunuchBomber a deal?”

IMO this is not a “Law & Order issue. If true, it’s just stupidity followed by more stupidity!

GFW on January 3, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Smoking gun.

Your turn.

Terrie on January 3, 2010 at 2:44 PM

Smoked sausage

darwin-t on January 3, 2010 at 7:28 PM

highhopes on January 3, 2010 at 7:17 PM

Actually, it could go on for 23 days if you think about it.

Akzed on January 3, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Once random “minor” attacks began, Obooba would use them as an excuse for marshall law, weapons confiscation, etc. They are his allies, after all.

Akzed on January 3, 2010 at 7:46 PM

I guess this is why Iran refused to allow Kerry a visa to travel to therr country. The cowardice and incompetence on the scale of this entire administration could be contagious. No reason for Iran to take any chances with these laughingstocks just for amusement.

volsense on January 3, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Man caused disaster causers will cower in fear.

Fetch….The Comfy Chair!!

RDuke on January 3, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Cardinal Fang… READ THE CHARGES!

Khun Joe on January 3, 2010 at 7:59 PM

A new tidbit re Hezbollah in South America: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1071743.html

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 8:09 PM

Mr. Abdul Ramalamadingdong (sorry if misspelled) should be extended all the rights accruing to any terrorist American or non-American including paid counsel. This is America ladies and gentlemen! Attorney General Holder and the staff at Covington and Burling should see to it immediately. The firm should (and will after a change in administration) have a very close tax audit. It’s the American way. We are only as strong as our compassion, or something and other stuff. Look over there! Oops! Nothing to see here. Move along.

Mason on January 3, 2010 at 8:25 PM

And here is another link that shows how long Hezbollah in South America has been on the terrorist-watch radar: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17874369/

Will TSA be looking for terrorists routed through those countries?

onlineanalyst on January 3, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Once random “minor” attacks began, Obooba would use them as an excuse for marshall law, weapons confiscation, etc. They are his allies, after all.
Remember this when THEY come out to play.
FMCDF. “From my cold dead fingers”. C. Heston a real PRESIDENT who did represent his people!

Col.John Wm. Reed on January 3, 2010 at 8:50 PM

We. Are. Screwed.

Dopenstrange on January 3, 2010 at 9:06 PM

So we’ve gone from no negotiating with terrorists to “Let’s Make a Deal”?

chickasaw42 on January 3, 2010 at 9:26 PM

I love how when our enemies use something for propaganda they are they the first to jump and abandon the plan. Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Gitmo…but when the AMERICAN PEOPLE disapprove of something, they vote for it in dead-of-night sessions of Congress.

bds1976 on January 3, 2010 at 9:27 PM

Here’s the deal, Sparky. You tell me what I want to know, and I’ll take that hungry ferret out your ass …
Doorgunner on January 3, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Way to many people in San Fran Nan’s and Barney Franks district who would pay for that.

jpmn on January 3, 2010 at 10:16 PM

I don’t know why anyone would be surprised by this. The Democrats have ALWAYS considered international Islamic terrorism as a law enforcement issue, not a national security (read: military) issue.

Spiny Norman on January 3, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Here’s the “deal”: either cooperate, or we hang you with a pigskin noose this Friday.

Then, after he spills the details, hang him anyway.

Infidel taqqiya.

profitsbeard on January 3, 2010 at 10:41 PM

Cap’n,

“No smoking gun”? Please.

As Kristol said, “He is the smoking gun!”

We already know from the Hasan Terror Attack that some mystery official in the administration decided that Major Hasan’s emails to Awlaki in Yemen did not constitute a “smoking gun” either.

Presumably that official is still in place making those same dangerous kinds of poor judgements.

Q: Did that same official also decide that there was no smoking gun when the UnderBomber trained with Awlaki just like in Maj. Hasan’s case?

And is Brennan that official?

Talk about your smoking guns…what if one official (besides the president, I mean) were responsible for bungling both the Hasan case and the UnderBomber?

Noel on January 3, 2010 at 10:42 PM

These guys give the term “Clueless” a bad name. :/

Theophile on January 4, 2010 at 1:39 AM

Deal?

Just offer him some calamine for his barbecued bollocks.

No speaky, no calamine.

Better than waterboarding and self-inflicted.

uptight on January 4, 2010 at 3:39 AM

While I would much preferred that we water-boarded what we need out of him, I don’t have much of a problem with cutting a deal with the shmuck to get it. This dude is a bumbling stooge who won’t be a real threat in the future. What’s important is that we get some good intel on the planners and enablers.

MJBrutus on January 4, 2010 at 5:02 AM

This is complete failure of upholding their “Oath Of Office” for uncountable officials;
If this isn’t a “travesty”, then the Barack Administration has renamed it.

Cybergeezer on January 4, 2010 at 9:09 AM

Who is the eunuch? Brennen is just trolling for Napolitono job because the culture in D.C. really says a women should never be is such a position.

MSGTAS on January 4, 2010 at 9:10 AM

The deal is you get to spend the rest of your emasculated life in prison and we don’t execute you.

Mojave Mark on January 4, 2010 at 9:26 AM

The video has some interesting moments, including Brennan’s insistence that we have to close Gitmo because AQ uses it for propaganda purposes.

How is this any different from the RINO’s declaring that the only acceptable candidate, is one that the liberals won’t tell lies about?

MarkTheGreat on January 4, 2010 at 9:29 AM

AND MORE CRIES AND EVIDENCE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS AND UNCONSTITUTIONALITY:
HERE AT THE NATIONAL REVIEW!

Cybergeezer on January 4, 2010 at 9:51 AM

How about “We’ll get ya some burn creme if you’ll talk, Squeaky.”

mojo on January 4, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Regular or extra crispy, should be the only deal he gets. I’m sure someone already used that line but I’m not going to scan for it.

austinnelly on January 4, 2010 at 5:01 PM

I would like to question him ….. on my terms ….

gstrickler on January 4, 2010 at 6:40 PM