What the Detroit airliner attack says about the Obama Administration

Posted: Dec 28, 2009 at 15:07
Category: Politics, Recent Topics
Viewed: 73
Comments: 3
Critics of the Obama Administration are questioning the President’s ability to keep the country safe after an al-Qaida linked terrorist easily boarded a flight to Detroit with explosives strapped onto his body. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who had been flagged as a potential terrorist, boarded the Northwest Airlines flight departing from Amsterdam on Christmas day.
The Associated Press reports that he is accused of trying to detonate an explosive device hidden on his body as the plane approached Detroit. Law enforcement officials say that he tucked a small bag holding a potentially deadly conconction of liquid and powder explosive materials under his waist.
Fortunately, the device burst into flames without exploding and Abdulmutallab was subdued by passengers. The plane managed to land safely despite the potential disaster. The attack may have been an act of retaliation by al-Qaida since U.S. intelligence has helped Yemeni forces carry out two airstrikes against the terrorist operatives in Yemen this month. The second airstrike was launched one day before Abdulmutallab attempted to bring down the Detroit-bound plane.
While vacationing in Hawaii, Barack Obama released an official statement regarding the attack:
“It’s absolutely critical that we learn from this incident and take the necessary measures to prevent future acts of terrorism. We do not yet have all the answers about this latest attempt, but those who would slaughter innocent men, women, and children must know that the United States will do more than simply strengthen our defenses. We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us, whether they are from Afghanistan or Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia, or anywhere where they are plotting attacks against the U.S. homeland.”
How many terrorist attacks do we need to “learn lessons” from? Didn’t 9/11 expose all the national security weaknesses that needed to be improved in order to ensure a safer country? I thought we learned all the lessons necessary to prevent future catastrophic terrorist plots, but apparently I was wrong. The element that makes this story so outrageous is the fact that there were gargantuan red flags surrounding Abdulmutallab, and yet he was still able to shimmy past the airport security checkpoints with complete ease.
Abdulmutallab even came to the attention of U.S. intelligence last month when his own father, a prominent Nigerian Banker, noticed his increasingly extremist religious views and reported him to the American Embassy in Nigeria. His name was placed in the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment database known as TIDE, so he was clearly listed as a known or suspected terrorist. Yet he was able to board a plane to Detroit without a full body search? I can’t even get a sealed 3.2 ounce bottle of lotion through the security checkpoint.
This event obviously reflects poorly on the leadership and security of the U.S., and Barack Obama’s approval ratings continue to drop. In fact, the latest Rasmussen poll indicates that only 28% of the nation’s voters strongly approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President, while a whopping 40% strongly disapprove. Right now the Republican Party can easily accuse Obama and the Democratic party of being weak on national security, which means that they have more material to smear him with during the 2012 elections. Maybe the Republicans are right. Currently we are at war in the Middle East, and we’re in the process of deploying an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. It only makes sense to expect some sort of retaliation when we invade any country. So why isn’t our national security up to par? These are real questions that voters are asking.
Investigations are still underway to determine how Abdulmutallab was allowed to board flight 253. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano conceded Monday that the aviation security system failed, backtracking from a statement Sunday in which she said it worked.



The terror attack failed but the fallout is continuing. Today, President Obama announced the initial investigation into this event which is a systemic failure of airline security. Yes we can do “everything”, but the cost is excessive. There has to be a trade-off between security and its cost (both the real and the opportunity cost). You are so right that with the change of “color”, the current president is no different from his predecessor. The airline security system is a joke that lulls us into a false sense of security. What is next — screening for devices in body cavities. Heads should roll but won’t. It sounds like the common apology “If I offended anybody, then I apologize”. Your comments are spot on. This is the fallout for drone attacks in other lands and other missions that we have not disclosed to the press. This is shoe-bomber Reid redux (yet again).
We have to do a risk cost tradeoff. You are right. We need to be smarter — using real people to screen rather than relying on electronic devices manned (or womanned) by people who are not highly paid. We would be better to follow the lead of the El Al and do real screening – profiling and asking pertinent questions. This will require time and effort to develop but the payoff is huge. There have been no terror plots on El Al.
Reply to this comment
I agree with grip that we need to change this politically correct notion that profiling is wrong and do smart profiling based on behavior. Surely re warning flags would be raised if I bought a one-way ticket and paid cash for it. We need the screeners to use their intelligence (which is really lacking) to do selective screening. This idea that when I have a cast on my leg or I’m old and have a cane or walker, I might be concealing a bomb, doesn’t fly with me. The FBI is smarter than that. The screeners need to be more intelligent and not screen everyone the same way they are now, for fear they’ll offend someone. If we have any more screenings, the system will collapse and we’ll have to get to the airport really early.and then maybe I won’t go by plane and I’ll drive or take the train on the east coast where we live.
Reply to this comment
Also we need to make security progressive – where the security is “smarter” the closer we are to boarding the plane (perimeter spot checks at approaches to the airport, spot checks in the terminal, a simple security check in to enter the departure area, with behavioral questions being asked, random checks in the terminal, and then checks in the departure lounge (they did this in Amsterdam, the last time I left for the US), and a secret agent on board critical flights. If we screen people only once, the system won’t really work.
Reply to this comment