Arrest Made in Times Square Terror Attack
A total of three people were taken off the flight, but information is scarce about the other two. And the Taliban video claim? It was posted from Connecticut as well. As it starred known Taliban, that video claim that this was a Taliban attack seems even more solid than earilier.
Federal authorities arrested a U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent Monday night at New York's JFK International Airport in connection with Saturday's attempted Times Square car bombing. The man was identified as Faisal Shahzad, of Connecticut, Attorney General Eric Holder said. Shahzad was attempting to board a flight to Dubai at the time of his arrest, Holder said.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:12 AM
Comments
1
I think you need to be a little more careful. The 2005 bombings in London were claimed by Al Qaeda and the bombers included clips of Al Qaeda in at least one of their videos, but no link was established beyond the obvious one of inspiration. They were homegrown.
Likewise the 2007 failed bombing in London which used a propane/gas device very much like the one used in NY, was also homegrown, despite messages on Al-Hesbah. There is a world of difference between pointing to the Taliban for inspiration and having the actual bombing being a Taliban plot. The NY bomb doesn't seem to have any physical connection to the Taliban's master bomb-maker, does it?
It's sexier to point to the Taliban, but what's important is finding the actual criminals so they can be arrested, and so our efforts at preventing future attempts are focus in the right place.
Likewise the 2007 failed bombing in London which used a propane/gas device very much like the one used in NY, was also homegrown, despite messages on Al-Hesbah. There is a world of difference between pointing to the Taliban for inspiration and having the actual bombing being a Taliban plot. The NY bomb doesn't seem to have any physical connection to the Taliban's master bomb-maker, does it?
It's sexier to point to the Taliban, but what's important is finding the actual criminals so they can be arrested, and so our efforts at preventing future attempts are focus in the right place.
Posted by: Jim at May 04, 2010 07:37 AM (VPTxh)
2
"...but what's important is finding the actual criminals so they can be arrested, and so our efforts at preventing future attempts are focus in the right place."
"Criminals?" This is not a law enforcement issue. We've been damn lucky that the last several attempts have failed. Law enforcement only works after the fact. "What's important" is tracking the terrorist network back to its roots and killing them. They are at war with us, even if we are not at war with them. How many more thousands must die before we take this threat seriously??
"Criminals?" This is not a law enforcement issue. We've been damn lucky that the last several attempts have failed. Law enforcement only works after the fact. "What's important" is tracking the terrorist network back to its roots and killing them. They are at war with us, even if we are not at war with them. How many more thousands must die before we take this threat seriously??
Posted by: Diogenes Onlin at May 04, 2010 08:31 AM (2MrBP)
3
what worries me is that they let him board the plane with s flaged under the united arab emerints.wouldent that be the same as being in there country or at there embassy?
Posted by: Rich at May 04, 2010 08:38 AM (siQqy)
4
It is a law enforcement issue, unless you're advocating Predator drone strikes in Conn or Colorado.
It's simply not true to say LE only works after the fact,Zazi and Ahmedzay, and heck even Jihad Jane were caught ahead of time. Yeah it's a lot harder to catch US citizens than it is to blow folks up in Pakistan, which is why we should focus on the guys here that are harder to catch.
Obama has many more boots on the ground in Afghanistan, and has used many more drones than the previous administration, check out the plots on the Long War Journal. Whether either approach is working is debatable, but it's covered. Pointing to NW Pakistan, when the bombers are US citizens living here isn't by itself going to prevent the next attack.
It's simply not true to say LE only works after the fact,Zazi and Ahmedzay, and heck even Jihad Jane were caught ahead of time. Yeah it's a lot harder to catch US citizens than it is to blow folks up in Pakistan, which is why we should focus on the guys here that are harder to catch.
Obama has many more boots on the ground in Afghanistan, and has used many more drones than the previous administration, check out the plots on the Long War Journal. Whether either approach is working is debatable, but it's covered. Pointing to NW Pakistan, when the bombers are US citizens living here isn't by itself going to prevent the next attack.
Posted by: Jim at May 04, 2010 09:15 AM (VPTxh)
5
Is that white man off the hook??? And where is the mug shot of the accused?
Posted by: duncan at May 04, 2010 11:05 AM (lGcPs)
6
A naturalized U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent travels to Peshawar, returns to this country and successfully places a bomb in Times Square - thank God that it didn't detonate. This is a law enforcement success story??
Posted by: Diogenes Online at May 04, 2010 11:28 AM (2MrBP)
7
No Diogenes, the people I mentioned who were arrested before committing acts of terrorism were law enforcement success stories. You had claimed such cases do not exist. But yes, making an arrest 48 hours after the attempt is great police work as well.
And yes, the rest of the ongoing case in the US is in the hands of law enforcement and has to remain there -- unless of course you want to see drones in the USA.
Or are you seriously arguing that US citizens no longer have Constitutional Rights?
And yes, the rest of the ongoing case in the US is in the hands of law enforcement and has to remain there -- unless of course you want to see drones in the USA.
Or are you seriously arguing that US citizens no longer have Constitutional Rights?
Posted by: Jim at May 04, 2010 11:40 AM (YPeWM)
8
"Or are you seriously arguing that US citizens no longer have Constitutional Rights?"
No - I'm seriously arguing that the root of the problem isn't in CT or CO; well beyond the legal reach of USLEO. I'm arguing that this was not a LEO success story just because the device didn't detonate. I'm arguing that anyone(including U.S. citizens) that travel to Peshawar and return to the U.S. bear watching.
Finally, I'm arguing that this administration has been skating on thin ice for well over a year with multiple near misses and their luck and ours may be running out...
No - I'm seriously arguing that the root of the problem isn't in CT or CO; well beyond the legal reach of USLEO. I'm arguing that this was not a LEO success story just because the device didn't detonate. I'm arguing that anyone(including U.S. citizens) that travel to Peshawar and return to the U.S. bear watching.
Finally, I'm arguing that this administration has been skating on thin ice for well over a year with multiple near misses and their luck and ours may be running out...
Posted by: Diogenes Online at May 04, 2010 12:10 PM (2MrBP)
9
This administration had done more in Afghanistan and Pakistan than the last one did.
The root of the problem is over there and over here. These last bombers (attempted and arrested) were over here, ignoring that (law enforcement) will not make us safer.
The root of the problem is over there and over here. These last bombers (attempted and arrested) were over here, ignoring that (law enforcement) will not make us safer.
Posted by: Jim at May 04, 2010 12:19 PM (YPeWM)
10
"Or are you seriously arguing that US citizens no longer have Constitutional Rights?"
If they keep making strawman arguments as stupid as this one, then yes, they should no longer have any rights. Forget the Eighth Amendment - burn 'em at the stake.
If they keep making strawman arguments as stupid as this one, then yes, they should no longer have any rights. Forget the Eighth Amendment - burn 'em at the stake.
Posted by: Nine-of-Diamonds at May 05, 2010 10:58 PM (Eg9Id)
11
Yes it's a stupid argument, but it's no strawman, McCain, King, et. al. have been asking why Shahzad was read his rights, as if there is any other choice.
Posted by: Jim at May 07, 2010 04:45 PM (YPeWM)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0097 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0073 seconds, 19 records returned.
Page size 9 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.