Muslim Father Warned Authorities About Abdul Mutallab Six Months Ago
Posted Dec 27, 2009

Muslim Father Warned Authorities About Abdul Mutallab Six Months Ago

by Sheila Musaji

How is it possible that with the amazing ability of computers to organize and retrieve information quickly, an individual like Abdul Farouk Abdul Mutallab who tried to blow up the airplane in Detroit on Christmas day could have ever been allowed to board a plane for the U.S.?

According to news reports Abdul Mutallab may have been in Yemen before flying to Europe and then the U.S.  All of this would have been noted in his passport.  And, with the current concerns about Anwar Al Awlaki in Yemen as one of the sources of radicalization among young Muslims, wouldn’t the Yemeni passport stamp alone have raised some concerns and alerted security to the need for extra precautions in checking out this individuals baggage and personal items?  Is it possible that he boarded the plane without a passport?

According to Metro Detroit Live at least one passenger on the same plane says that he saw Abdul Mutallab trying to board the plane without a passport.

According to the   U.K. Daily Mail“He was on American security watch-lists because of his links with Yemeni firebrand Anwar Al Awlaki who was in email contact with the Muslim US army psychiatrist who shot 13 of his fellow soldiers in Fort Hood, in Texas, last month.”

According to the Pittsburgh Tribune“His father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, the recently retired chairman of one of Nigeria’s top banks and a frequent visitor to the United States, acknowledged in several media interviews that the suspect is his son. He said he had alerted Nigerian and U.S. embassy officials six months ago about his son’s increasingly militant views and unusual behavior and was surprised to learn that the young man had been allowed to travel to the United States.    In an interview with the Associated Press, he said he thought his son “might have been to Yemen” in the months since he severed ties with the family.    A Nigerian newspaper, This Day, quoting relatives, said the family had been “uncomfortable with the boy’s extreme religious views,” leading to the decision to alert law enforcement officials.”

According to the Times Online“THE son of a prominent Nigerian banker, who allegedly attempted to blow up a transatlantic flight over America, was barred from returning to Britain earlier this year. “

It would seem as if this would have been enough to ensure that it would be difficult if not impossible for this young man to board any plane heading for the U.S. 

The Pittsburgh Tribune also reported that:  “A U.S. official said the father’s warning did not go unheeded. “We didn’t sit on the information. It was shared across the interagency,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, referring to the group of U.S. agencies tasked with preventing terrorist attacks.”

This makes no sense.  Exactly how was the father’s warning heeded?  If the information was shared, was it also entered in computer databanks accessible to airport security?  Why with all of these red flags was this individual not on the “no fly list”? 

According to the Wall Street Journal“This alleged attack on a U.S. airplane on Christmas Day shows that we must remain vigilant in the fight against terrorism at all times,” Attorney General Eric Holder said. “Had this alleged plot to destroy an airplane been successful, scores of innocent people would have been killed or injured. We will continue to investigate this matter vigorously, and we will use all measures available to our government to ensure that anyone responsible for this attempted attack is brought to justice.”

I hope that the vigilance Mr. Holder mentions extends to re-assessing our security procedures.  It would seem that the most effective strategy would be prevention rather than bringing perpetrators to justice after the fact.