Somali's guilty plea in terror case disclosed
WASHINGTON — A Somali national indicted on federal terrorism charges pleaded guilty nearly a year and a half ago, Justice Department officials announced on Monday, disclosing a previously secret agreement with prosecutors.
Ahmed Abdulkadir Warsame was captured in the Gulf of Aden by the U.S. military in April 2011 and held for questioning aboard a Navy ship for more than two months. He was charged with providing material support to the Islamist militant group al-Shabab and al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, conspiring to provide explosives training and committing other offenses.
He pleaded guilty in December 2011 in New York, according to the plea agreement. As part of the deal, Warsame agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities, and Justice Department officials agreed to take steps to try to ensure the safety of his family.
Officials touted the case as a counterterrorism success that blended civilian and military options in an incident involving a foreign militant.
“The capture of Ahmed Warsame and his lengthy interrogation for intelligence purposes, followed by his thorough questioning by law enforcement agents, was an intelligence watershed,” said Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.
A Justice Department official said prosecutors withheld disclosure of Warsame's plea out of concerns that their ability to obtain information from him could have been jeopardized.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Supreme Court’s health care law ruling worries 34 states
- Monarch butterflies find milkweed supply dwindles
- Huge, ancient quasar could alter theories on black holes
- Perceived slights have some New Yorkers longing for Pennsylvania
- Homeland Security panned for passing on bio-threat technology
- Florida fisherman’s high court win spurs call for legal reform
- Paul edges Walker in CPAC straw poll
- Most young Republicans back legal marijuana
- Gene making human brains bigger found
- Ice storm stops flights, slows traffic in parts of Texas
- Regulators approve tougher rules for Internet providers