Obama: Flawed anti-terrorism policies

Obama's terrorism advisor John Brennan on Sunday TV talk shows: "there was no smoking gun". What an idiotic statement to try to explain away airline security failures. There was "no smoking gun" on Sept. 11 either. The idea is to catch them before they blow up an airplane.

Who Is the Enemy? [Victor Davis Hanson]

I don't think anyone knows quite what this administration's anti-terrorism policy is. Last August, Obama's counterterrorism chief, John Brennan, lambasted the Bush administration, citing "the inflammatory rhetoric, hyperbole and intellectual narrowness that has often characterized the debate over the president's national security policies" and criticizing the conduct of counterterrorism during the eight years following 9/11.

But more than one-third of all terrorist plots since 9/11 transpired in 2009 — despite loud chest-thumping about rejecting the idea of a war on terror, reaching out to the Muslim world, and apologizing for purported American sins. A non-impoverished Major Hasan or Mr. Mutallab (or Mr. Atta or KSM) does not fit with the notion that our enemies act out of poverty or oppression or want.

In fact, what we are witnessing is a strange mishmash. On the one hand, after repeatedly trashing the Bush protocols in 2007–08, Obama has quietly adopted most of them — keeping the Patriot Act, intercepts, wiretaps, renditions, the concept of tribunals, Predator attacks, forward offensive strategies in Afghanistan, and the Bush-Petraeus timetable in Iraq.

But on the other hand, the Obama administration has embraced largely empty symbolism — promising to "close Guantanamo within a year," mouthing euphemisms such as "overseas-contingency operations" ("this administration prefers to avoid using the term 'Long War' or 'Global War on Terror' [GWOT.] Please use 'Overseas Contingency Operation.'"), and "man-made disasters," while announcing showy new politically-correct moves (such as a public trial for KSM) and subjecting CIA operatives to legal hazard.

In both the Major Hasan and Abdul Mutallab cases, the administration has shown initial confusion about the nature of the danger and security breach. The simultaneous announcement of both more troops and a withdrawal date from Afghanistan did not correct the image of confusion and hesitancy.

What to make of all this?

Apparently, the Obama administration came into office in January 2009 thinking that the notion of a "war on terror" was archaic and largely had been an excuse for the Bush-Cheney nexus to scare the nation for partisan political purposes. Given the long period of calm after 9/11, the somnolent "good" war in Afghanistan, and the sudden quiet in the "bad" Iraq theater, Obama preferred to focus on Bush's constitution-shredding rather than on national security. What vestigial danger remained could be changed by the charisma of Barack Obama, the obvious appeal of his ancestry to the Muslim world, and the ritual demonization of George Bush.

But Obama has discovered that there really are radical Islamic threats; that Bush's record of seven years of security was no accident; and that the "good" war is heating up. Obama has been forced by events to quietly find ways of emulating Bush's successful anti-terrorism formula, while making loud but empty declarations to mollify his liberal base (which so far seems pacified that Guantanamo is "virtually" closed, and that KSM is "virtually" facing an ACLU dream trial).

Radical Islamists sense, fairly or not, that this administration is angrier at prior officials who kept us safe than it is at those who wish to destroy us for who we are. Given his adoption of the Bush protocols, Obama might show the same magnanimity toward his predecessor that he does toward the Muslim world.


Will We Set Abdulmutallab Free? [Bill Burck]

During his rounds on the morning news shows yesterday, John Brennan, President Obama's top counterterrorism expert, justified treating the underwear bomber as a criminal with all the rights of a U.S. citizen, rather than an enemy combatant with no right to remain silent or demand a lawyer or a civil trial, by arguing that the government can offer him a plea bargain in exchange for his cooperation. In other words, just like we give deals to drug smugglers or mobsters to give up information on bigger fish in their criminal enterprises, we can do the same with Abdulmutallab. But once again, the Obama administration doesn't seem to get it. Had Abdulmutallab been designated as an enemy combatant from the start, we would not have had to offer him anything at all in exchange for the information he possesses. He could have been interrogated immediately by professionals without Miranda warnings, without a lawyer, and against his will. Given that he appears to have been willing to talk for awhile before he demanded a lawyer, it is a fair assumption that he would have continued talking if he didn't have the option of lawyering up.

Implicit in Brennan's justification is the notion that the government can give Abdulmutallab something every criminal defendant wants — the opportunity for early release. And in most cases, cooperating defendants get just that, and judges reward them by reducing their sentences in exchange for their cooperation against other criminals. Presumably, then, the White House has authorized the Department of Justice to begin negotiating with Abdulmutallab's lawyer to find out what kind of deal he wants. This means that the Obama administration may be contemplating recommending to a judge that Abdulmutallab get a reduced sentence, or perhaps no sentence at all. Yes, folks, they may actually be thinking about setting this terrorist free at some point.

So, here are the perverse incentives for terrorists who come to this country to kill us — assuming you don't succeed in blowing yourself up and are captured, you will have a right to a lawyer, a right to remain silent, a right to trial by a jury of your "peers," and the possibility of early release if you cooperate with authorities. We are a generous nation indeed.

— Bill Burck is a former federal prosecutor and deputy counsel to President Bush.