By Nitya

Jan 6, 2010 3:19pm

The Abdulmutallab Indictment

Today’s criminal indictment of Umar Farouq Abdulmuttalab – who attempted to blow up Northwest flight 253 on Christmas Day — is for six counts, per ABC News’ Jason Ryan:

1) attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction;
2) attempted murder within an aircraft in the jurisdiction of the US;
3) willful attempt to destroy an aircraft within the jurisdiction of the US;
4) willfully placing a destructive device on an aircraft, which was likely to endanger safety of such aircraft;
5) possession of a firearm/destructive in furtherance of a crime of violence; and
6) possession of a firearm/ destructive in furtherance of a crime of violence.
 
The full indictment can be read HERE.

-jpt

User Comments

Obama is running scared at the moment, and that’s probably a good thing for us
The accused unwittingly performed a service in waking up the Obama administration. Much as only Nixon could get away with recognizing Red China in his day, only Obama could get away with instituting profiling against citizens of Muslim countries.

Posted by: Bob | January 6, 2010, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm

He should be in Guantanamo.

Posted by: Dennis | January 6, 2010, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

“He should be in Guantanamo.”
*****************************
Didn’t you hear? There was a transparent campaign promise to close it?
Besides, until the latest “pivot” that’s the spot to get yourself shipped back to Yemen for more education.

Posted by: Bob | January 6, 2010, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm

This is bad news. He should be held as an enemy combatent. At least for a while.
Here’s why:

Posted by: Paul | January 6, 2010, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm

He has been charge – just like the shoe bomber under the Bush administration – and he will be found guilty and punished – just like the shoe bomber under the Bush administration.

Posted by: tierra | January 6, 2010, 3:49 pm 3:49 pm

tierra,
He’s in the court system now – innocent until proven guilty. You can’t make such pronouncements.
————
More importantly, however, they will most likely not get any intel from him whatsoever. He is now fully lawyered up – and any helpful info we could have gotten from him will almost certainly go to the grave with him.
Perhaps a terrorist attack that could have been averted. See the case of Ramzi Yousef as an example.

Posted by: Paul | January 6, 2010, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm

Obama is running scared at the moment, and that’s probably a good thing for us
The accused unwittingly performed a service in waking up the Obama administration.
Bob | Jan 6, 2010 3:27:17 PM
If the accused ‘woke up the Obama administration,’ how is it that a week BEFORE the underwear bomber Obamaauthorized cruise missile strikes on Al Qaeda in Yemen facilities? Obama seemed plenty awake then, and pretty well aimed before this terrorist set foot in an airport. Perhaps the smoking holes in the ground distracted the bomb maker as he made the final checks? I guess you didn’t notice.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:02 pm 4:02 pm

Tierra:
You are right………”and he will be found guilty and punished – just like the shoe bomber under the Bush administration.”…..

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 4:06 pm 4:06 pm

This is bad news. He should be held as an enemy combatent. At least for a while.
Paul | Jan 6, 2010 3:41:18 PM
He was arrested in the US and he’s an idiot stooge, like most of the young men recruited by Al Qaeda. I trust the judicial system laid out by the Founding Fathers to deal with just such vicious murderers to do its job, just as did under Bush (he had a habit of appointing judges from third-tier religious colleges, but even they are competent for such a simple case).

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm

Why do Republicans have so little faith in the U.S. Constitution? It seems to have worked pretty well for them with the Reed and Mousawi prosecutions. What didn’t work so well was Cheney’s decision to release the Yemeni Al Qaeda leaders from Guantanamo. A little less hypocrisy, a little more constructive problem solving from the Republicans would be appreciated.

Posted by: B. Bear | January 6, 2010, 4:12 pm 4:12 pm

He was arrested in the US and he’s an idiot stooge, like most of the young men recruited by Al Qaeda. I trust the judicial system laid out by the Founding Fathers to deal with just such vicious murderers to do its job, just as did under Bush (he had a habit of appointing judges from third-tier religious colleges, but even they are competent for such a simple case).
***********************************
What does whether or not they’re “idiot stooges” have to do with it? In passing, most of them are well educated idiots. Of course, that applies to some in Washington DC as well.
This particular stooge was talking until his court-appointed lawyer stepped in. Now there’s rumor of a plea-bargain, and administration flacks can’t even explain why some “suspects” get civilian trials while others get military trials. This alleged suspect allegedly committed his alleged crime before he’d entered the U.S. Is the “line” halfway across the ocean?
It’s all politics and “optics.” Change some can believe in…

Posted by: Bob | January 6, 2010, 4:14 pm 4:14 pm

What does whether or not they’re “idiot stooges” have to do with it?
Bob | Jan 6, 2010 4:14:53 PM
Suicide bombers have never been found to have valuable intelligence. That’s kinda relevant don’t you think?

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:17 pm 4:17 pm

B. Bear and others–
It is our great love for and belief in the Constitution that motivates us to want the courts, acting within the bounds of the Constitution, to try CIVIL cases and other cases, such as TERRORIST ones, to be tried in military courts. See, the idea is: try civilian cases in civilian court when there are civilian crimes and try terrorism cases in military courts because we are at war, you see.
I love the law and the Constitution so much I don’t want enemy combatants to clog our case dockets and waste our time.
Is it so hard to understand that there is a difference between protocol in civilian and military matters? Apparently, yes.
Meanwhile, back in Yemen, Abdul….’s friends laugh. At Obama and the stupid west that would Mirandize a terrorist.

Posted by: kelli | January 6, 2010, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

republicans are cowards at heart, it’s easily seen, they wrap themselves up in the flag and misquote the constitution, when it comes time to rely on the very system they brag about, they don’t trust it ..
hypocrites to the extreme
Republicans were running the country, screaming about the threat from N. Korea, did they do anything…no
same with Iran,, imminent threat to America, did they do anything…. no
but they did look good on TV proclaiming the idiocy they represent

Posted by: TJ | January 6, 2010, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm

He has been charged – just like the shoe bomber under the Bush administration – and he will be found guilty and punished – just like the shoe bomber under the Bush administration.
—————————————
He’s in the court system now – innocent until proven guilty. You can’t make such pronouncements.
Posted by: Paul | Jan 6, 2010 3:59:22 PM
_____________________________
Sure can . .. just did. I predict he will be found guilty and punished. Too many witnesses, too much evidence . .. he’s a done duck.

Posted by: tierra | January 6, 2010, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm

Meanwhile, back in Yemen, Abdul….’s friends laugh. At Obama and the stupid west that would Mirandize a terrorist.
kelli | Jan 6, 2010 4:19:41 PM
Back in Yemen, they are looking for a place to hide since Obama authorized cruise missile attacks on their bases (the first US strikes in Yemen) a week BEFORE the underwear bombing attempt.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

Under Bush’s administration Richard Reid (aka Shoe Bomber) serving a life sentence in a prison in Colorad:
“on January 16, 2002, Reid was charged with eight criminal counts related to his acts of terrorism, namely: attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, placing an explosive device on an aircraft, attempted murder, interference with flight crew members and attendants, attempted destruction of an aircraft, using a destructive device during and in relation to a crime of violence and attempted wrecking of a mass transportation vehicle.[2]”
Get your facts straight…

Posted by: jjjjjulie | January 6, 2010, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm

Tierra.
I am glad for you to admit that Obama will do the same as the Bush administration did.

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm

He should be in Guantanamo
Why? It should be closed by now.

Posted by: Timeline | January 6, 2010, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm

“I am glad for you to admit that Obama will do the same as the Bush administration did.”
Hope and Change! He’s Bush II.

Posted by: Cheney | January 6, 2010, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm

“Perhaps the smoking holes in the ground distracted the bomb maker as he made the final checks? I guess you didn’t notice.”
Doesn’t distract them in Yemen much…Or Afghanistan/Pakistan for that matter.

Posted by: Ali | January 6, 2010, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm

“I am glad for you to admit that Obama will do the same as the Bush administration did.”
______________________________________
The current President is intelligent enough to use what works. To draw on the best ideas from all sources. I don’t think he particularly cares if it was used in the past by Bush.

Posted by: tierra | January 6, 2010, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm

Look at the date the shoe bomber appeared in court and get back to me.
Bob | Jan 6, 2010 4:29:23 PM
So now it’s a good thing that Bush waited until after his vacation to deal with it? Interesting.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm

I am glad for you to admit that Obama will do the same as the Bush administration did.
CW | Jan 6, 2010 4:26:05 PM
If that is true, then why do Republicans have such a hatred of him? He will do the same as Bush, right?

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm

I am glad for you to admit that Obama will do the same as the Bush administration did.
CW | Jan 6, 2010 4:26:05 PM
If that is true, then why do Republicans have such a hatred of him? He will do the same as Bush, right?
Posted by: jhw539 | Jan 6, 2010 4:43:11 PM
And I can’t figure out the liberals hatred of Bush if Obama is doing the same thing he already did. You’d think he’d know better, huh? Guess Obama really IS just another politician. What a let down that must be for the “followers”.

Posted by: Shoe | January 6, 2010, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm

Everybody stop saying that our President is Bush II he is not. He will do what must be done to protect this country. He is doing a far better job than Bush ever did all Bush ever did was get us into this mess, Our current president is trying to get us out of this mess and turn the country around no easy task figure 8yrs of Bush and he left us with a big mess to clean up. THANK YOU BUSH FOR NOTHING. I like our new president and as far as I am concerned he is doing a very good job,just give him a chance he’s got a lot to try and clean up after BUSH.

Posted by: Orlando | January 6, 2010, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm

===If that is true, then why do Republicans have such a hatred of him? ===
Mostly because of his domestic policies.

Posted by: Axey | January 6, 2010, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm

Orlando…… You are joking right? Obama will do what must be done to protect our country? He can start by firing Napolitano.
The fact is, Obama can’t connect the dots.

Posted by: Cw | January 6, 2010, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm

Tierra said Obama was the same as Bush.

Posted by: CW | January 6, 2010, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

I don’t think he particularly cares if it was used in the past by Bush.
Posted by: tierra |
Nonsense. What Bush did was carefully researched by the Obama administration.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 6, 2010, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

And I can’t figure out the liberals hatred of Bush if Obama is doing the same thing he already did. You’d think he’d know better, huh?
Shoe | Jan 6, 2010 4:47:23 PM
Here’s a clue, liberals live in reality and see clearly Obama is NOT doing the same things as Bush in the key areas of their greatest concerns.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm

I don’t think he particularly cares if it was used in the past by Bush.
Posted by: tierra |
Nonsense. What Bush did was carefully researched by the Obama administration.
Foghorn Leghorn | Jan 6, 2010 5:20:28 PM
That’s a bit of non sequitur – were you trying to reply to some other post of hers? The one you quoted doesn’t have the slightest suggestion that Obama does not know what Bush did in the past, but rather that Obama’s selection of an action is based on his prediction of its effectiveness NOT whether Bush ever did anything similar.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm

Bush vs. Obama; blah, blah, blah….

Posted by: LongT | January 6, 2010, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

Here’s a clue, liberals live in reality and see clearly Obama is NOT doing the same things as Bush in the key areas of their greatest concerns.
Posted by: jhw539 |
Here’s another clue. The greater the concentration of liberals, the greater the fiscal crisis of the local and state gov’t.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 6, 2010, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm

The one you quoted doesn’t have the slightest suggestion that Obama does not know what Bush did in the past, but rather that Obama’s selection of an action is based on his prediction of its effectiveness NOT whether Bush ever did anything similar.
Posted by: jhw539 |
Your inability to grasp the point does not make it any less valid.

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 6, 2010, 5:42 pm 5:42 pm

This should keep many lawyers busy for years to come. I wonder if Eric Holders old firm has anyone available to help this poor, poor fellow out?

Posted by: david | January 6, 2010, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

Back in Yemen, they are looking for a place to hide since Obama authorized cruise missile attacks on their bases (the first US strikes in Yemen) a week BEFORE the underwear bombing attempt.
Posted by: jhw539 | Jan 6, 2010 4:24:53 PM
I wonder if these missile strikes will have more or less an effect on terrorist recruitment than the existence of Gitmo.
I wonder if these missile strikes in foreign country with which we are not at war could be considered a war crime.

Posted by: twg | January 6, 2010, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

I wonder if these missile strikes in foreign country with which we are not at war could be considered a war crime.
twg | Jan 6, 2010 5:47:48 PM
Not by any accepted definition since they were taken with the consent of the recognized leadership against a recognized enemy of the United States. Although I’m sure if you hung out on The Ave in Berkeley long enough you could find some aging hippies willing to call them war crimes.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm

Your inability to grasp the point does not make it any less valid.
Foghorn Leghorn | Jan 6, 2010 5:42:25 PM
In much the same way that bread is selling for 1 yuan in China today.

Posted by: jhw539 | January 6, 2010, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm

How about charging him with pyrotechnic masturbation on an airplane? :) The govt. loves to charge somebody after arresting him, but the question is, why wasn’t he arrested before he got on the plane?
If the govt. had been doing Muslim Ideological Profiling (MIP), he would never have boarded. If he had a better bomb, he wouldn’t be around to charge with anything, nor would 300 innocent victims of govt. negligence. I don’t see any govt. heads rolling yet, do you?
Study Islam’s history from its rise in the 7th cent. to understand the radical Islamic mindset that caught Xmas Underwear Bomber up and is making converts daily while the govt. is too pig-headed to create an al-Qaida (i.e., a database) of them and use it to protect us.

Posted by: TL Winslow | January 6, 2010, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

When is a missile strike a war crime? If they are against a state which we are not at war with, that is the crime of aggression (the worst war crime, as it precipitates all others). The strikes can be war crimes even if we are at war with the country attacked, however, if the attacks are indiscriminate. A number of civilian casualties would be prima facie evidence that an attack was indiscriminate. Indiscriminate attacks of course are also likely to be terroristic, since only a terrorist group would launch such an attack.

Posted by: Flash Override | January 6, 2010, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm

If they are against a state which we are not at war with, that is the crime of aggression…
Posted by: Flash Override |
So, if we accept your definition, Bill Clinton, W and Obama are war criminals?

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 6, 2010, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm

according to Republican Peter King, we only need to have the President constantly repeat the word terrorism to insure the safety of America, imagine that, just saying the word will keep us safe..
you have to wonder why someone like King when given the opportunity on a national ABC broadcast to voice the republican view on defense, homeland security and other national issues, can only come up with the suggestion that Obama say the word terrorism more, ..
this follows the republican meme that Obama doesn’t use the word, which is a lie, and easily proven so by anyone inclined to actually look and check.
this brings up a real concern, since this meme is so easily proven as a lie, why do republicans like King, who are involved in defense and security issues continually lie.. even former VP Cheney has been called out on this lie, but still they do it.. but they offer no valid policy.
it’s beginning to look like republicans have a pathological obsession with repeating a known lie, .. no one should be surprised

Posted by: XX | January 6, 2010, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm

It seems to me that Mr Obama is doing much more than the Bush administration..pakistan and yemen are fighting on our side and eliminating the enemy

Posted by: jojo | January 6, 2010, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm

This idiot from the Detroit flight…. is a complete loser. I hope the country spends very little time talking about the fool. Relegate him to a cell somewhere and let him rot.
I will admit that I am impressed that these idiots are reduced to stuffing explosives in their underwear to attack us. There’s no way on earth to stop all the suicide missions these fools can launch but their panties full of explosives is really about as stupid and barely effective as it can get.
Obama, keep them in their trenches with cruise missles and predators. Keep our troops off shore where they can sleep relatively safe in their bunks. Knock em off one by one and two by two. We can keep that up for the next 100 years.
Maybe their next bright idea will be replacing their fillings in their teeth with explosives. What a bunch of losers.

Posted by: Robert | January 7, 2010, 12:26 am 12:26 am

The point is … is the policies set in place by another President is NOT working…now that we KNOW it wasn’t worth the paper it was written on…the Obama’s administration has got to revise it. But listening to right, they have all the answers but it is their system that failed.
It is not easy to change what is already in place…ex: healthcare robbing, credit card robbing, when so many ignorants are blinded by party partisan. Now that the administration KNOWS that it wasn’t the “system” that keeps us safe,(the talking point of the Republicans) I’m pretty sure this administration will have the support of Congress and the NO men, to revise it to work

Posted by: sara | January 7, 2010, 3:33 am 3:33 am

“”"”"”It seems to me that Mr Obama is doing much more than the Bush administration..pakistan and yemen are fighting on our side and eliminating the enemy”"”"”
Posted by: jojo
And what, with Bush they were attacking us? Right now, Yemen doesan’t want our help and we are upsetting Pakistan because they want to handle it within their own borders. So yes, Obama is upsetting them more.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 7, 2010, 8:42 am 8:42 am

sara — Let’s examine what this administration has changed that affects our capabilities. 1) The CIA was humiliated by the liar Pelosi in public. 2) Obama stripped the CIA of theier tools for international terrorist interrogations relegating them to simple questions and answer sessions for information. 3) Obama has apologized to Muslims worldwide hoping for a terrorist change of heart that they may now like us somehow. 4) Obama gives terrorists all the rights of a natural born US citizen even when they try and murder siad US citizens. Yeah, I think I will blame this weak administration for taking away the teeth and claws of our security organizations.

Posted by: lfrichar | January 7, 2010, 8:46 am 8:46 am

The CIA was humiliated by the liar Pelosi
Posted by: lfrichar
I guess it’s time for you and the republicans to offer to hold the hands of CIA and protect them, so they will not be afraid by that terrible Nancy Pelosi, if the CIA really is ‘ humiliated’ as you imply, they are worthless to national security
re: So yes, Obama is upsetting them more.
now the fringe is worried about upsetting the rest of the world? you’re 8 years late.

Posted by: XX | January 7, 2010, 1:38 pm 1:38 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.