In Which Dennis Blair Slaps His Head and Exclaims "Duh!"

So caught up was I in the remarkable Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts that it took until today for me to read the Stephen F. Hayes piece about the testimony before the Homeland Security Committee yesterday.

One of the findings of the 9/11 commission report was that the criminal justice approach to terrorism was a failure. Yet here we are again. After the Christmas Day terror attack attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab many of us asked, "Why isn't this man being held as an enemy combatant?" Incredibly, he was arrested, interviewed, Mirandized, and then he shut up.

Dennis Blair issued a statement after his testimony yesterday in which he insisted that the FBI obtained "important intelligence" in their questioning of Abdulmutallab. Really? I bet.

Stephen F. Hayes points out some absolutely incredible revelations from the testimony yesterday.

It appears as if Attorney General Eric Holder made the decision to treat this case in criminal court on his own. That's not really shocking. What's shocking is that he didn't seem to consult anyone else.

Our four top counterterrorism officials were not consulted: Janet Napolitano, Michael Leitner (chairman of the National Counterterrorism Center), Dennis Blair, and FBI Director Robert Muellar. It's incredible to me that Holder would make such a decision without even making the pretense of talking to these people.

Astonishing as that information is, it is only the tip of the iceberg. When the executive order was issued to close Gitmo, it also established a "high-value interrogation unit" (HIG) which was to make these decisions - that is, the HIG was to decide if a person is to be tried in criminal court or by some other means.

But the unit isn't functional yet. One year after the order to close Gitmo, the unit isn't up and running. What amateurs would make a decision to close Guantanamo without a plan or place to move those detained there, and no plan to process any that might need to be detained in the future? That unit should have been fully functional as soon as the decision was announced.

In the absence of such a unit, Holder makes the decision himself. This is the same attorney, mind you, who worked previously at a firm that represented several Gitmo detainees pro bono.

There's more.

Blair's testimony yesterday included this mind-numbing statement (emphasis mine):

"Frankly, we were thinking more of overseas people and, duh!, we didn't put it then. That's what we will do now. And so we need to make those decisions more carefully. I was not consulted and the decision was made on the scene. It seemed logical to the people there but it should have been taken using this HIG format at a higher level."

Got that? Nobody anticipated having to deal with a terrorist in the United States, just ones overseas. Are you kidding me?!

Muellar believes that the decision made at the time was perfectly proper (emphasis mine):

"The decision to arrest [Abdulmutallab] and put him in criminal courts, the decision was made by the agents on the ground, the ones that took him from the plane and then followed up on the arrest in the hospital," Mueller told the committee. He also said: "In this particular case, in fast-moving events, decisions were made—appropriately, I believe, very appropriately—given the situation."

Given the situation? "The situation" is that this guy was on an airplane with nearly 300 people on board and tried to blow it up. How much more evidence do you need that he's a terrorist, or an enemy combatant? Did anybody really have to pause and think too hard that he might be associated with al-Qaeda? That this might be connected with the overall War on Terror? Oh wait - I forget. That doesn't exist anymore. Or, as Blair would say, "Duh!"

Mueller also testified that the FBI agents "interviewed" Adbudlmutallab. Shall we parse the difference between "interview" and "interrogate"?

If you go back to the etymology of the two words, interview comes from the French entrevue or the reflexive s'entrevoir, which means to see each other, or visit briefly. Interrogate, on the other hand, comes from the Latin interrogatus, which means to question, or examine.

To interrogate someone is a bit less friendly, in our context.

Nobody thought it necessary to interrogate Abdulmutallab, but we did interview him. Probably got him a cup of coffee, and sandwich, maybe. Definitely a lawyer.

It's clear that this administration learned nothing from the 9/11 commission or from 9/11 itself. This administration seems to be under the impression that the War on Terror is really over and that just because Obama was elected the terrorists don't have any interest in killing us anymore. Certainly they won't come to the United States; if anybody really thought they would then they would have been darned sure the HIG was in place for situations just like this one.

Instead, we have our heads in the sand.

The Chinese Uighurs

National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair said this week that some Gitmo detainees may very well be released into the United States; not only that, they would have to be provided with assistance and training to start their new life. As one might expect, this created a firestorm of criticism in the press.

The group most likely to be released here would be the Chinese Uighurs who were cleared for release quite some time back but have no place to go. The United States is concerned that they would be tortured or killed if returned to China. The Uighur population in China is primarily from the northwest region but there are smaller communites throughout China.

I went back to my friend Gordon Cucullu who wrote Inside Gitmo and took another look at the Uighurs. He writes:

"To the security-minded Chinese government officials, the Uighur community has a darker side. Within the Uighur community are extremist groups who are radical Islamist fundamentalists dedicated to using terrorism to achieve their goals of independence."

Well, now that's reassuring. Isn't it? No? Cucullu continues:

The Uighurs "were captured in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, in which they were by their own admission undergoing training so that they could return to China to be terrorists supporting an independent Uighur Islamic nation."

The camps where they were captured were in the notorious Tora Bora region.

Thomas Joscelyn at The Weekly Standard has done some excellent reporting on the Uighurs. He writes:

"First, the Uighur detainees are alleged, for good reasons, to be members or associates of the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM). The ETIM is a designated terrorist organization affiliated with al Qaeda.

There is sound evidence that the Uighur detainees are affiliated with the ETIM. For example, most of the detainees have made admissions during their tribunals and hearings at Guantanamo that tie them to the group. The ETIM is a jihadist organization and not part of some noble anti-China resistance. So, even if you have sympathy for the Chinese government’s opposition (as I do), including other Uighur organizations, the Uighur detainees at Guantanamo are not part of any legitimate, anti-Chinese government organization that deserves our support. The ETIM is an ideological cousin of al Qaeda that seeks to establish a radical Islamist state throughout South and Central Asia."

"The ETIM has openly targeted and threatened civilians, as it did last year during the Chinese Olympics. In a publicly-released video, an ETIM member stood in front of al Qaeda’s black flag as he threatened anyone who attended the Olympics. The ETIM has also executed terrorist bombings against civilian targets inside China. ETIM trainees have fought alongside Taliban forces in Afghanistan on a number of occasions. They have also been used to buttress other al Qaeda-allied jihadist forces throughout Central Asia, including in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan."

Why on earth would we choose to import terrorists? And why are we so concerned with what happens to them in the first place? I say send 'em back to China and let China worry about them.

The idea of bringing them to the United States is crazy enough on its own without the additional insult of using taxpayer dollars to fund their new life. Welfare. The euphemistic "assistance."

The Obama administration is more concerned with keeping an ill-conceived campaign promise than with the security of the American people. Are they so naive that they think this move will raise us up in the eyes of the international community and erase the "blight" of Guantanamo? Iran could care less if we bring these guys over here and give them "assistance." They'll continue to hold Roxana Saberi without charge in a Tehran prison. They won't be impressed with our magnimity.

Where will we settle these guys? Will they have to register in the same way sex offenders do? Not likely. Will they settle in "sanctuary cities"? Will we keep track of them? I guess we'll have to so we can keep sending them those welfare checks.

The Uighurs are still committed to their cause and there is little reason, according to Cucullu, that they won't continue to fight from within the United States.

Bone-headed idea.

Welfare for Gitmo Detainees?

This just stuns me. It shouldn't, but it does.

[National Intelligence Director Dennis] Blair also said the Obama administration is still wrestling with what to do with the remaining 240 detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, which the president has ordered closed.

Some of the detainees, deemed non-threatening, may be released into the United States as free men, Blair confirmed. Blair said the former prisoners would have get some sort of assistance to start their new lives in the United States. "We can't put them out on the street," he said.

Really? We know that at least 61 of those already released are already engaged in militant activities. Those are just the ones we know about.

Let's give them welfare, build them a house, fix them up with a nice "green" car, and see how they do, Okay? Brotherly love and all that.

It gives a whole new meaning to the term "bailout."