Christmas Terror

From the Detroit Free Press:

A terror suspect who claimed to have al-Qaida connections could face charges as soon as today for attempting to blow up a Delta-Northwest flight as it was landing at Detroit Metro Airport on Friday, law enforcement officials said.

Officials identified the suspect as Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, 23, a Nigerian national. It was unclear Friday why he allegedly wanted to attack the flight, arriving from Amsterdam. Passengers subdued him as he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive device that failed.

…the flight began in Nigeria and went through Amsterdam en route to Detroit.

There was nothing out of the ordinary until Northwest Flight 253 was on final approach to Detroit, said Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory. That is when the pilot declared an emergency and landed shortly thereafter, Cory said in an e-mail message.

There were 278 passengers aboard the Airbus 330, and the flight was about 20 minutes from the airport when there was a sound like a firecracker exploded, witnesses said. One passenger jumped over others and tried to subdue the man. Shortly afterward, the suspect was taken to a front row seat with his pants cut off and his legs burned.

Some of the facts reported late Friday:

  • One U.S. intelligence official said the explosive device was a mix of powder and liquid and failed when the passenger tried to detonate it.
  • A law enforcement source said the explosives may have been strapped to the man’s body but investigators weren’t immediately certain, partly because of the struggle with other passengers.
  • One law enforcement source said the man claimed to have been instructed by al-Qaida to detonate the plane over U.S. soil.
  • The official said a determination of a terrorist act would have to come from the attorney general.
  • The official added that additional security measures were being taken without raising the airline threat level.

The last two bullet points concern me. 

  • Of course it’s a terrorist act!  A person tried to blow himself up to take a planeload of passengers with him.
  • The flight originated in Nigeria – who knows what security measures they have, and this is definitely a threat.

Note to the President:  Just because you make speeches and promise to close Guantanamo Bay, terrorists will keep coming!  No matter how it’s spun, closing that prison will not stop people from joining a terrorist group.  An excerpt from an earlier post:

…there are people in the world that want to kill you just for the reason that you exist!! And we still seem to pursue the idiotic mantra of appeasement to those who wish nothing more than to destroy our country and subjugate us to their religion.

Just the mere fact that this latest attempt was performed over the United States and on Christmas Day should give even the most Liberal apologists pause to consider that there is no appeasement or compromise with these people.  No, this is a war, period, but it is with a well funded religious ideology instead of a country.  The sooner that our leaders realize this instead of treating it as a bunch of criminal acts will mean that a greater focus will be brought to bear upon these organizations.


About Tom Roland

EE for 25 Years, Two Patents - now a certified PMP. Married twice, burned once. One son with Asperger's Syndrome. Two cats. Conservative leaning to the Right. NRA Life Member.
This entry was posted in Holiday, Radical Islam, Terrorism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Christmas Terror

  1. Joe says:

    They aren’t going to be “deplomaticized” away. They’ll keep coming and coming until they get what they want: our destruction.

    I trust you had a wonderful Christmas celebration!

  2. Tom says:

    Joe – There is nothing civilized about these people – only bent on terror and destruction.

    dcat – Not only alive from surviving the attempt to kill himself, but from the passengers jumping on him. As far as next month is concerned, I hope things are uneventful.

  3. The president made it clear in his peace prize speech, that these terrorists will not lay down their arms through negotiations. They will have to be forced, and killed. He is not professing an idiotic mantra of appeasement.
    I doubt the president believes that by closing GITMO, terrorists would stop trying to kill us. In fact he said during the 60 minutes interview, just the opposite.
    I heard the threat level was raised to orange. Doesn’t that mean airline security is enhanced? I don’t know.
    Do you really think the President is bald face lying when he makes statements contradicting your allegations of his appeasement?

  4. Oh no.

    No, oh no.

    Already the Leftist & Demorats are coming out on my blog indicating it MUST be OUR fault.

    WE are OVERreacting! They were ONLY fireworks!

    Muslims to blame?? Oh NO NO NO!

    You must be a racist/religionist!


  5. Yabu (EOTIS) says:

    I’ve got a “third” bullet…just sayin’

  6. Tom says:

    Tom – Actually, he is contradicting himself. One of the reasons that he gave for closing Gitmo on the campaign trail and shortly after he became President was that keeping Gitmo open would be a recruitment tool for terrorists. Sounds good, but it’s appeasement regardless. He has also stated in speeches prior to his peace speech that there had to be negotiations and talks with the Muslim world so that their culture could be understood (i.e., why are they mad at us?). Last are his world apology tours, in which he denigrated the United States, and that does nothing but weakens the position of the United States. The bottom line, in my mind, is that he is more concerned with looking good & being perceived as a good person rather than being a strong, decisive one. Otherwise, why did it take three months to decide on what to do with his general’s recommendations for troop levels in Afghanistan? No, he can make all sorts of speeches, but his actions do not match his words.

    BZ – Hasn’t Obama apologized enough for us yet? Perhaps another carbon-belching world apology tour is needed…

    Yabu -??

  7. The man just sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. So he took a while to make up his mind, what did that hurt? He made the decision within the time line the general asked for.

    And it did not help to have his general blabbing to the press what his advise to the president was, before the president made his decision. They must have had words about that, because days later the general was in front of the Senate committee screaming his approval of the presidents decision. I would have fired the press seeking general.

    I am not aware of negotiations going on with Muslim terrorists. Muslim countries, a different story, I’m not aware of what kind of negotiations are going on with Muslim countries, but it would not mean appeasement with Muslim terrorists.

    What apology tour? You mean a bow to a Chinese leader?

    Bush told the country he would like to close GITMO also. What’s the difference between Bush wanting to close GITMO, or Obama wanting to close GITMO?

  8. There is only a small number of people (Dick Cheney) making noises about the time the President took to make his decision. The public did not express an over concern. The General is on board with the timetable. McCain had no problems with it. The pundits did not seem to think it was a serious problem. President Bush (who ignored Afghanistan for 6 years while he prosecuted his war in Iraq) was quiet on the point, and should be. There is no evidence that the enemy did get a build up advantage during this time. I just don’t see the time period as being as destructive as you state.

    The announcing of a withdrawal date, is a message to the leaders of Afghanistan to get their act in order. America is not there forever. That needs to be said. It might give our enemy hope, but we won’t leave until the job is done, and all our leaders have said so. It should also announce that we will take it to the enemy. We will search them out. They will not be allowed to sit and hide. History from Marco Polo, to Churchill, to Russia shows it’s a losing proposition to try and fight a long term (multiple years) war in that part of the World. The Powell doctrine is needed in this action.

    We will have to disagree with negotiating with Iran. Simply talking with an enemy does not show “Compromising with or caving in to these countries amounts to appeasement, and weakens the US position and status.” It all depends on what is discussed. There is no evidence that Obama has given any slack on Iran. In fact his peace medal speech seemed to be a message to Iran, that he will, as he has stated for years, not allow Iran to become an atomic weapons State.

    I see nothing wrong with housing GITMO prisoners on the mainland. Are we afraid? Lets have a little courage in the face of an inescapable prison situation. I totally do not get the fear people have about whether, or not those prisoners are here, or not. I think the fear that they are, is irrational. I sounds like just another talking point to attack the president for.

    Whether or not they are tried in civil, or military court, is a legal decision I do not know enough about. I do have confidence in our civil system, that they will get the justice they deserve. Again, I fail to see the fear towards our civil justice system. Seems there is a lot of false fear surrounding some of these issues.

    I still don’t get the apology tour thing. What has he apologized for? Admitting mistakes, is not caving to the World, or defining ourselves as weak, if that’s what your talking about?

  9. Tom says:

    I agree that the US should not be in Afghanistan nor Iraq long term. What I have issues with is advertising the timeline for Afghanistan – it violates a basic principle of war (do not let the enemy know your plans).

    We will have to see how Iran and other countries are handled by this administration. At this point in time, I’m not impressed.

    Enemy combatants are the responsibility of the military courts and prison system, not civil ones. Moving them to a civilian prison moves the jurisdiction from military to criminal, where the rules are different. It’s a point of law, if anything, but I have no doubt that the terrorists will be punished accordingly. However, in a civilian criminal court, there is more of a chance that the terrorists can grandstand, and a even greater possibility that potentially sensitive material could be leaked.

    As far as an example of an apology tour, read Oliver North’s article at

    Perhaps I have a problem with Obama trading handshakes with Chavez & Ortega while snubbing our allies. Maybe there is an issue with him bowing to Saudi kings or the Chinese where he should be meeting them as equals. And maybe I’m disappointed that Obama wishes to rid the world of nuclear weapons, and yet has not shown any leadership in trying to prevent North Korea and Iran from developing them.

    Then again, a Saturday Night sketch described Obama’s accomplishments as being “jack and squat.” Perhaps they are on to something…

  10. Mr Pink Eyes says:

    There is no way that this man ever should have been allowed on a plane headed to the United States, all of the warning signs were there. Much like the Fort Hood terror attack, our Hoeland Security has failed us. If it were not for the fact that the fuse did not set off the device properly we would be looking at 300 dead Americans and Janet Napolitiano has the stones to go on television and state that the system worked.
    You would think that by now we would have a system in place that would have prevented this man from getting as close as he did to carrying out an attack on an airplane.

Comments are closed.