posted September 25, 2006 06:47 PM              

Thank you Bush and company for your war on creating terrorism!

From Monday's Globe and Mail

WASHINGTON — The U.S.-led war in Iraq has enflamed the Muslim world, spawned a new generation of jihadists and fuelled terrorism rather than throttling it, according to elements of a highly classified intelligence report leaked Sunday.

The White House said the leaked and partial accounts failed to reflect the main thrust of the document, a National Intelligence Estimate drawn from 16 American spy agencies. But officials didn't deny the import of what was published.

"The Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse," one intelligence official was quoted as saying by The New York Times, which published some of the broad conclusions of the still-secret report, "Trends in Global Terrorism."

U.S. President George W. Bush has vigorously defended his decision to attack Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein, despite the subsequent absence of the outlawed chemical, biological and nuclear weapons that underpinned the original justification for waging war.

Throughout the subsequent insurgency and worsening sectarian strife, Mr. Bush has insisted that the war and occupation were justified and vital as the "central front" in the "war on global terrorism."

Democrats have grown increasingly critical of the President's policies in Iraq. The House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi of California, said that news reports about the intelligence estimate are "further proof that the war in Iraq is making it harder for America to fight and win the war on terror."

Her Senate Democratic counterpart, Harry Reid of Nevada, said "no election-year White House P.R. campaign can hide this truth -- it is crystal clear that America's security demands we change course in Iraq."

However, Democrats are loathe to make Iraq and the struggle against Islamic extremism the pivotal issue in this fall's election campaign. Despite Mr. Bush's low approval ratings and the increasing majority of Americans voicing doubts about Iraq, the party cannot agree on a coherent alternative policy.

Yesterday, some Republicans used the report to shore up the President's insistence that quitting Iraq would be a huge mistake, even as they decried the leak.

"There's nothing secret in our nation's capital," lamented Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, a staunch backer of Mr. Bush's "stay the course" policy.

"The benefits of success [in Iraq] are enormous, and the consequences of failure are enormous," Mr. McCain said, adding that the slower-than-hoped-for pace of success in Iraq may be encouraging the terrorists.

According to The Times, the assessment concludes that self-generating Islamic extremist cells are proliferating around the world -- possibly inspired by al-Qaeda but not directly linked to the organization. The report says the long, bloody war in Iraq, coupled with reports of U.S. atrocities and allegations of torture and ill-treatment at Guantanamo Bay and other prisons, has fomented Islamic radicalism.

Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy, one of the few who questioned the need to attack Iraq before the invasion, said the report "should put the final nail in the coffin for President Bush's phony argument about the Iraq war."

In a rare attack on Mr. Bush's handling of the conflict since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, former president Bill Clinton rejected accusations that he failed to chase down Osama bin Laden. Rather, he said in interviews yesterday, it was Mr. Bush who "did nothing" for eight months after taking office.

A National Intelligence Estimate is considered the premier product of all of the myriad spy agencies. One completed before the Iraq war concluded that Mr. Hussein was hiding and developing outlawed weapons of mass destruction. It proved to be wrong.

The latest report on the trend in Islamic extremism was apparently completed in April. Richard Holbrooke, formerly Mr. Clinton's ambassador to the United Nations, said it confirms what many have said for a long time -- that Iraq wasn't originally where the terrorists were.

"The 9/11 terrorists didn't come from Iraq, but Iraq has become a breeding ground for terrorists. It's increased anti-Americanism around the world. It's contributed to other crises. It's strengthened Iran," he said.

With a report from New York Times

posted September 26, 2006 12:20 PM              

Do you suppose those U.S. Spy Agencies got it wrong?

There are some here, ya know, who are not going to want to believe "those lies!

Know what I mean?

posted September 27, 2006 05:39 PM            

Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said that the US military presence in Iraq keeps neighbors from invading his country.
"The American presence has always prevented any kind of foreign invasion to Iraq," Talabani said.

"That's one of the main reasons why we think that we need an American presence, even symbolical, in the country to prevent our neighbors attacking us," he said at a forum at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think thank.

Talabani also said Baghdad could not "further tolerate" neighbors' interference in its internal affairs.

"I think that our neighbors must understand that our patience is limited," he said, refusing to single out countries but adding "we mean all of them."

Iraq shares borders with Syria, Iran, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Asked if there was concern over aggression from Turkey, Talabani said: "I don't think there is any danger for invasion by Turkey to Iraq."

Iraq has "good relations" with the government of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and could help Ankara in its conflict with the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), he said.

"We could convince PKK to stop fighting in Turkey," the Iraqi leader said.

Talabani also insisted that Iraq would not spiral down into civil war.

"There would be no civil war. We have problems, we have some kind of extremists who are fighting against each other. They are not representing the whole society," he said.

He also defended the US military presence in Iraq.

posted September 27, 2006 05:54 PM            

"There are some here, ya know, who are not going to want to believe "those lies"

Hmmmm... not going to "want" to believe those lies. How about just not believing in them? There is no "want" involved. Who would "want" to believe in a lie?

posted September 27, 2006 06:40 PM            

I've been looking for a full copy of the report...instead of just the part the leftists at the NY Times and leftist democrats are focused on. Someone will provide a link in html format instead of pdf and the democrats will be exposed for attempting to mislead about what it says.

Bush Releases Leaked Iraq Terror Report
Tuesday, September 26, 2006

WASHINGTON — President Bush forcefully disputed the findings of a leaked intelligence report Tuesday, declaring that it was not a mistake to go into Iraq, and that U.S. forces stationed there have not caused a rise in terror around the world.

Bush said he was declassifying part of a classified National Intelligence Estimate completed last April because he wanted the public to be able to read the conclusions without filters that "create confusion in the minds of the American people."

Click here to read the declassified findings from the NIE.
http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/Declassified_NIE_Key_Judgments.pdf

"Some people have, you know, guessed what's in the report and have concluded that going into Iraq was a mistake. I strongly disagree. I think it's naive. I think it's a mistake for people to believe that going on the offense against people that want to do harm to the American people makes us less safe," Bush said from the East Room, where he was holding a press conference with Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai.

Bush said he agreed with one conclusion — that the effort in Iraq had forced Al Qaeda cells to become more diffuse and independent. But he questioned why such an old document had appeared on the front pages of major newspapers just six weeks ahead of the November midterm election.

The president said that the leak distressed him because, in part, it shows that someone in the government is trying to play politics, but moreso, because it hurts the intelligence collection process.

"I think it's a bad habit for our government to declassify every time there's a leak because it means it's going to be hard to get good product out of our analysts," he said.

The president rejected claims that the U.S. presence in Iraq has increased terror threats, saying the United States wasn't in Iraq when America was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001; or when the USS Cole was hit; or when the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were bombed.

"If we weren't in Iraq, they'd find some other excuse because they have ambitions. They kill to achieve their objectives," Bush said. "The best way to protect America is to defeat these killers overseas so we don't have to face them at home."

Karzai, whose country is facing an increase in terror after the Taliban were defeated in late 2001, interjected to offer a similar plea.

"Terrorism was hurting us way before Iraq or September 11 ... These extremist forces were killing people in Afghanistan for years, closing schools, burning mosques, killing children, uprooting vineyards," Karzai said. "They came to America on September 11, but they were attacking you before September 11 in other parts of the world. We are a witness in Afghanistan.

"Do you forget people jumping off the 80th floor or 70th floor when the planes hit them? Can you imagine what it will be for a man or woman to jump from that high?" Karzai asked recalling some of the more shocking scenes from the World Trade Center bombing. "How do we get rid of them? ... Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?"

Bush and Karzai spoke together one day ahead of a three-way meeting with Pakistan's President, Pervez Musharraf, whom Karzai says must do more to close extremist schools that teach terror.

Bush said Taliban and Al Qaeda remnants are trying to shut down Karzai's government because they see a threat from democratic institutions. Bush said Afghan forces are working with soldiers from dozens of nations under the NATO banner to make sure that the Taliban can't regroup.

"We've adjusted tactics and we're on the offense to meet the threat and defeat the threat," Bush said in a press conference with the Afghan leader.

"Our country will stand with the free people of Afghanistan," Bush added. "I know there are some in your country who question whether or not America has the will to do the necessary work to help you succeed. We've got that will."

Karzai thanked Bush for the military commitment as well as U.S. investment in economic reconstruction and education. Karzai said he was moved by stories he heard at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., where he met a wounded female soldier with six children who had gone to Afghanistan to help build a stretch of mountain road.

posted September 27, 2006 06:48 PM              

By Michael Carmichael

September 26, 2006
Planetary Movement

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

-- George Orwell, "1984"

Bush is President.

www.planetarymovement.org

It's official. Sixteen US government security agencies agree. The experts conclude that Bush's war against Iraq is the major force driving the global growth of Islamic terror, but their dire finding is supposed to be a state secret to be perpetually concealed from the American people.

Before the invasion of Iraq, the US had Al-Qaida cornered in Afghanistan and Pakistan, marginalized, ostracized and corralled into a finite ghetto for mad Mullahs only. Today, after three and a half years of war, five hundred billion dollars of treasure, nearly three thousand dead American soldiers and at least one hundred thousand dead Iraqi civilians we have done nothing more than make matters worse, infinitely worse. Bush's Iraq misadventure has been the most counterproductive policy in American history.

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was compiled in April 2006, but its release was suppressed when the White House learned of its contents. Worse, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Madame Secretary Condoleezza Rice continued to lie about the results of their failed policy. Now that the NIE report titled "Trends in Global Terrorism" has been leaked, we know that they have been lying, and they have been lying the big, big lie.:

This pathetic regime has been unmasked as the spitting image of the dystopian tyranny in George Orwell's prophetic novel, 1984, a fascist dictatorship organized under three sacred dictums

Ignorance is strength.

War is peace.

Freedom is slavery.

© Copyright Michael Carmichael, Planetary Movement, 2006

posted September 27, 2006 07:30 PM            

No where does it state what your Leftest commie author wrote. He is welcome to interpret things any way he'd like, but he is mispresenting the true report.

Here are some highlights (but read the entire paragraph, not some half wit article that only copies and pastes what he thinks will promote his ideology.

*** The Iraq conflict has become "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supports for the global jihadist movement. Should Muslim jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, TO HAVE FAILED, we JUDGE that FEWER FIGHTERS will be inspired to carry on the fight....

• Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1)
Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western
domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the
Iraq “jihad;” (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and
political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US
sentiment among most Muslims—all of which jihadists exploit.

Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged that, if fully exposed
and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the movement. They include
dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of the
jihadists’ radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and
criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens.

• The jihadists’ greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution—an
ultra-conservative interpretation of shari’a-based governance spanning the
Muslim world—is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims. Exposing the
religious and political straitjacket that is implied by the jihadists’ propaganda
would help to divide them from the audiences they seek to persuade.

• Recent condemnations of violence and extremist religious interpretations by a few
notable Muslim clerics signal a trend that could facilitate the growth of a
constructive alternative to jihadist ideology: peaceful political activism. This also could lead to the consistent and dynamic participation of broader Muslim
communities in rejecting violence, reducing the ability of radicals to capitalize on
passive community support. In this way, the Muslim mainstream emerges as the
most powerful weapon in the war on terror.

• Countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated
multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorist
leaders.

If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives. Nonetheless, attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities for jihadists to exploit.
Al-Qa’ida, now merged with Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi’s network, is exploiting the
situation in Iraq to attract new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.

• The loss of key leaders, particularly Usama Bin Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and
al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into
smaller groups. Although like-minded individuals would endeavor to carry on the
mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate strains and disagreements.
We assess that the resulting splinter groups would, at least for a time, pose a less
serious threat to US interests than does al-Qa’ida.

• Should al-Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against
Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global
threat.
• The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qa’ida in Iraq might
lead veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations.
Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al- Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless countered, are likely to expand their reach and become more capable of multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their traditional areas of operation.

• We assess that such groups pose less of a danger to the Homeland than does al-
Qa’ida but will pose varying degrees of threat to our allies and to US interests
abroad. The focus of their attacks is likely to ebb and flow between local regime
targets and regional or global ones.
We judge that most jihadist groups—both well-known and newly formed—will use
improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to
implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and that they will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.

• CBRN capabilities will continue to be sought by jihadist groups. While Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria, remain the most active state sponsors of terrorism, many other states will be unable to prevent territory or resources from being
exploited by terrorists. Anti-US and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fueling other radical ideologies. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more
quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to
pinpoint.

• We judge that groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to
communicate, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial
support.

_________________________

People will jump on a bandwagon that is against Western interests based on the fact that they hate all that is Western.

Anarchist groups, militants and others use the perceived "jihad" as a way to get back at the US and our Allies. They existed before we went to Iraq and will continue to exist. Islamic jihadists were attacking their neighbors, our interests, other countries WELL before Iraq.

The Leftests here can pretend this is all Bush's fault all they want, that doesn't make it true.

Jwhop,

posted September 28, 2006 05:24 PM            

The Bush administration's decision to declassify the conclusions of the National Intelligence Estimate yesterday revealed two truths about politics and the intelligence community, neither of which appear very complimentary. First, the Democrats allowed themselves to get outfoxed on national security yet again by allowing themselves to get hysterical and seriously misrepresent the conclusions of the NIE. As the Washington Post reports, Democrats made a lot of extraordinary claims about the NIE, which the report itself doesn't support:

President Bush took the extraordinary step of releasing portions of the classified report, which was completed in April, to counter assertions made after information from the document was leaked to media outlets over the weekend. Reports based on those leaks said the report blames the war in Iraq for worsening the global terrorist threat -- an interpretation that the administration calls a distortion of its contents.

Speaking at a White House news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Bush angrily called the leak a political act intended to affect the upcoming midterm elections. "Somebody has taken it upon themselves to leak classified information for political purposes," he said. ...

For the third straight day, Democrats sought to draw attention to the issue with news conferences and political maneuvers. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) moved to put the House into secret session to discuss the intelligence estimate, but the motion was defeated along party lines.

"With such a devastating and authoritative analysis of the Bush administration's failures in Iraq, the president and the Republican-controlled Congress now have a choice to make," said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.). "Will they stubbornly follow a failed stay-the-course strategy that America's intelligence community has concluded makes America less safe, or will they finally admit their mistakes and change course?"

In fact, the NIE doesn't offer any conclusions about successes or failures at present or in the past regarding Iraq. The actual conclusions of the intelligence community about Iraq take up one paragraph and one bullet point in the four-page document, and both do not assess the success or failure of the Coalition. It does, however, point out the consequences of both in the future:

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.

• The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.

It also lists the Iraq "jihad" as one of four main factors that fuel the spread of jihadism across the region, but note the other three:

Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq "jihad"; (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims - all of which jihadists exploit.
Factors one and three are directly impacted by the American forward policy of engagement that led to factor two.

The "neocon" impulse to use democratization as a method to reform the area addresses both of these factors. Self-government allows Arabs to determine their own foreign-policy goals and gives Arabs the tools to eliminate corruption and injustice, or at least to greatly reduce it from Ba'athist levels of the past.

Democratization also brings political reforms and a free market that resolves many of the oppressive triggers for radicalization by giving individual Arabs the freedom to create and own their own property and to protect it.

This is why we have to endure the Iraqi "jihad" until we succeed. The insurgency will collapse when Iraqis grow strong enough to defend themselves and rebuild their infrastructure in peace. In fact, no other strategy could possibly address factors one and three. Even if we packed up and walked out of Iraq, those factors would still exist -- as they have for decades -- and the fourth factor would remain from our economic engagement with the oppressive regimes that control the region. We have an opportunity to address all four factors by prevailing in Iraq.

posted September 28, 2006 06:48 PM            

You're right as usual. If anything further is said about this, it won't be a direct commentary but an indirect attack.

This forum is littered with threads where leftists had nothing to say...about hypocrisy, about lying reports, about lying democrats, about corruption, about treason/sedition or about the sinking fortunes of the leftist press and broadcast news media. They don't wanna talk about it.

posted September 28, 2006 07:15 PM            

quote:

---

As the Washington Post reports, Democrats made a lot of extraordinary claims about the NIE, which the report itself doesn't support:

---

Not true at all. Read for yourself. (This is the Washington Post story Jwhop's blog pointed to) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092600163.html?nav=rss_politics

Now, if we want to look at what was released, I'd be more than happy to.

Quotes from the Key Judgments of the NIE:

quote:

---

We also assess that the global jihadist movement—which includes al-Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.

---

quote:

---

Although we cannot measure the extent of the spread with precision, a large body of all-source reporting indicates that activists identifying themselves as jihadists, although a small percentage of Muslims, are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion.

---

quote:

---

If this trend continues, threats to US interests at home and abroad will become
more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.

---

quote:

---

Greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority nations would alleviate some of the grievances jihadists exploit. Over time, such progress, together with sustained, multifaceted programs targeting the vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement and continued pressure on al-Qa’ida, could erode support for the jihadists.

---

Hopefully that will be the case.

quote:

---

New jihadist networks and cells, with anti-American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.

---

quote:

---

We assess that the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in importance to US counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad but also in the
Homeland.

---

quote:

---

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.

---

Yeah, this stuff sounds really positive for us.

quote:

---

The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.

---

quote:

---

We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate.

---

quote:

---

Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1)
Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq "jihad;" (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims all of which jihadists exploit.

---

posted September 28, 2006 07:16 PM            

quote:

---

Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged that, if fully exposed and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the movement. They include dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of the jihadists radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens.

---

It's good that we and they are trying, but the outcome is speculation at this point (notice the use of the word could), and not cause for anyone to make assumptions about how well we're doing.

quote:

---

If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives. Nonetheless,
attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities for jihadists to exploit.

---

Once again, let's hope for the best. This statement shows another possibility, but it's fortunately written by someone that understands that things don't always work out the way we want them to.

quote:

---

Al-Qa’ida, now merged with Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi’s network, is exploiting the situation in Iraq to attract new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.

---

And now we're back into the straight up bad news again.

quote:

---

The loss of key leaders, particularly Usama Bin Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into smaller groups. Although like-minded individuals would endeavor to carry on the mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate strains and disagreements. We assess that the resulting splinter groups would, at least for a time, pose a less serious threat to US interests than does al-Qa'ida.

---

Oh, so we're good, "for a time"? How hopeful is that?

quote:

---

Should al-Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against
Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global
threat.

---

quote:

---

The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qa’ida in Iraq might lead veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations.

---

About this time I'm wondering how exactly this extended piece of the NIE provides perspective other than that which was already characterized? This IS NOT a good news report.

quote:

---

Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al-Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless countered, are likely to expand their reach and become more capable of multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their traditional areas of operation.

---

posted September 28, 2006 07:34 PM            

Exactly jwhop! I think the third party voice is what drives me up the wall. I can't count how many times I have heard people cop out to "well, I didn't write it - I just posted it".

If someone posts it - they endorse it. Simple as that - unless they are posting it with a commentary stating otherwise.

In any case, their tactics are consistent with much of the left wing philosophy- deflect, deflect, scream, lie, deflect...

which all leads to the same worn out Mantra..

Bush is a shape shifting alien LOL...

posted September 28, 2006 07:44 PM            

quote:

---

We judge that most jihadist groups--both well-known and newly formed--will use
improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to
implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and that they will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.

---

quote:

---

Anti-US and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fueling other radical ideologies. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to
pinpoint.

---

That's the end of the document.

posted September 28, 2006 07:56 PM            

You might want to actually post the entire paragraph instead of being misleading with your truncated quote.

The key word or phrase is "could"

This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more
quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to
pinpoint.

The key attackers... "leftest, separatist..etc.."

As is evident within our own Country, there are people hell bent on hate and violence. All they need is an excuse or cause to kill. One only needs to look at Neo-Nazi organizations or the violent spin-off of the already weird PETA - Animal Liberation Front.

Some people love violence - Some people HATE America- this gives them an excuse to kill Americans.

Let's look at it this way..

If we know that incarcerating pedophiles causes rapists to become angry and target schools to blow up bombs, do we stop incarcerating the pedophiles or do we now look at taking them both to prison?

Terrorism has always existed, there will be a rise in terrorism due to the attention and excuse to use the war on Iraq as an excuse to kill Westerners.

Read the points that indicated what works in our favor. The benefits outweigh the potential risks..

posted September 28, 2006 08:10 PM            

You forgot to notice the comma between NIE and the rest of the sentence acoustic.
Have you already forgotten the use of a comma in English grammar to set apart different thoughts, phrases or elements within a sentence?

This doesn't say the Washington Post said/reported: "which the report itself doesn't support.

posted September 28, 2006 09:11 PM            

You know, I don't even need to tell you this. It's so silly. I'll just post the Washington Post article. It's clearly not how it's portrayed by your blogger.

Part of Iraq Intelligence Report Is Released
'Political' Leaks of Paper Led to Decision, Bush Says

By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; A01

The Bush administration yesterday released portions of a classified intelligence estimate that says the global jihadist movement is growing and being fueled by the war in Iraq even as it becomes more decentralized, making it harder to identify potential terrorists and prevent attacks.

The war in Iraq has become a "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and drawing new adherents to the movement, the assessment says. The growth in the number of potential terrorists is also being fed by corruption, slow-moving political reform in many Muslim countries and "pervasive" anti-American sentiment, according to the report.

The jihadist movement is potentially limited by its ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam and could be slowed by democratic reforms in the Muslim world, says the document, which reflects the collective judgment of the nation's 16 intelligence agencies. In addition, it asserts that if jihadists are perceived to be defeated in Iraq, "fewer fighters would be inspired to carry on the fight."

Still, terrorists with experience constructing roadside bombs and other deadly devices in Iraq "are a potential source" of leadership in attacks elsewhere, the report says.

President Bush took the extraordinary step of releasing portions of the classified report, which was completed in April, to counter assertions made after information from the document was leaked to media outlets over the weekend. Articles based on those leaks said the report blames the war in Iraq for worsening the global terrorist threat -- an interpretation that the administration calls a distortion of its contents.

Speaking at a White House news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Bush angrily called the leak a political act intended to affect the upcoming midterm elections. "Somebody has taken it upon themselves to leak classified information for political purposes," he said.

The president added that it is naive to think that terrorism would be any less pervasive if the United States had not invaded Iraq, repeating his oft-made point that extremists attacked U.S. interests around the world long before the start of the war.

"My judgment is, if we weren't in Iraq, they'd find some other excuse, because they have ambitions," Bush said. "They kill in order to achieve their objectives."

Bush said he reluctantly ordered the release of the National Intelligence Estimate so people can form their own conclusions about it. "You can read it for yourself," he said. "We'll stop all the speculation, all the politics about somebody saying something about Iraq, somebody trying to confuse the American people about the nature of this enemy."

Disclosure of parts of the document, which represents the U.S. intelligence community's first formal assessment of terrorist threats since the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, did nothing to quell the partisan storm that has been brewing since the first stories about it surfaced.

Democrats have seized on the document to bolster their contention that the war in Iraq has been a debacle that has hindered broader anti-terrorism efforts, even as the administration calls Iraq the central front in a global struggle.

For the third straight day, Democrats sought to draw attention to the issue with news conferences and political maneuvers. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) moved to put the House into secret session to discuss the intelligence estimate, but the motion was defeated along party lines.

"With such a devastating and authoritative analysis of the Bush administration's failures in Iraq, the president and the Republican-controlled Congress now have a choice to make," said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.). "Will they stubbornly follow a failed stay-the-course strategy that America's intelligence community has concluded makes America less safe, or will they finally admit their mistakes and change course?"

Democrats challenged the White House to release the full report. "The American people deserve the full story, not those parts of it that the Bush administration selects," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.). "President Bush should declassify the entire NIE as the Republican chairman of the Senate intelligence committee has suggested so the American people can read the plain facts for themselves."

Bush announced his decision to declassify parts of the terrorism assessment after a meeting with Karzai. During the meeting, he told the Afghan leader that the United States will stand by him in his battle against a resurgent Taliban and other Islamic extremists.

"I know there are some in your country who wonder whether or not America has got the will to do the hard work necessary to help you succeed," Bush told Karzai. "We have got that will."

Bush restated his commitment to help the Afghan government as he is working to warm the increasingly frosty relations between Karzai and another critical ally in the U.S. anti-terrorism efforts, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, president of neighboring Pakistan. Bush met with Musharraf on Friday, and the three leaders are scheduled to meet and have dinner this evening at the White House.

The fruitless search for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and the surging violence by Taliban fighters, particularly in southern Afghanistan, have contributed to friction between Karzai and Musharraf. They have blamed each other for the continued trouble, with Karzai suggesting that Musharraf is not doing enough to find bin Laden, who is widely believed to be hiding in one of the remote tribal-controlled areas of Pakistan.

Musharraf counters that Karzai has not done enough to address the grievances of Afghan people who have joined the Taliban or who support it.

Although the intelligence report offers a sobering picture of the global terrorist threat, it points to counterterrorism successes, including the killing or capture of much of the al-Qaeda leadership, and the condemnation of extremist views by "a few notable Muslim clerics."

It also says that a backlash could develop against Islamic radicals if they continue to kill fellow Muslims.

Still, the assessment warns, the underlying factors fueling the spread of jihadists' radical ideology "outweigh its vulnerabilities," a situation the report says is likely to continue for some time.

Karzai, speaking at the news conference, offered passionate support for Bush's efforts to combat terrorism. "These extremist forces were killing people in Afghanistan and around for years," he said. ". . . They came to America on September 11th, but they were attacking you before September 11th in other parts of the world. . . . Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?"

Staff writers Charles Babington and Jonathan Weisman contributed to this report.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company
_________________________________________________

Anyone can see that they treated the material fairly.

Anyone can also clearly see that your blog sentence is not accurate.

posted September 28, 2006 09:55 PM              

It's like a breath of fresh air when you pop in with your calm and intelligent reasoning...

Thank you for your "fair and balanced" contributions....

Much appreciated....

posted September 29, 2006 12:52 AM              

Al Qaeda gains recruits from Iraq war - UN study
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/002762.html

posted September 29, 2006 08:09 PM            

The surrender artists in democrat ranks are the best friends terrorists have on earth.

That comment you keep focusing on doesn't say what you think it says. First, it's a report on what the Washington Post reported AND the conclusions the writer reached after reading that article in the Washington Post.

"Democrats made a lot of extraordinary claims about the NIE"...this is true. Democrats got way out in front and misrepresented what the NIE actually concluded. Namely, they attempted to use the NIE to support their position to "redeploy" out of Iraq...cut and run.

"the report itself doesn't support"...doesn't support the positions democrats have been taking. Namely, the NIE says terrorist recruitment will be deflated by terrorists being defeated in Iraq. That is NOT a good argument for "redeploying" US forces....the very argument cut and run democrats have been and still are making.

September 29, 2006 12:12 AM
Terrorists’ Excuse du Jour
If there were no Iraq war, extremists would just find another rallying cry.
By Jonah Goldberg

Of course the war in Iraq has made us less safe, and I didn’t need the National Intelligence Estimate to tell me so. Who could possibly deny that Iraq has become, in the words of the NIE, a “cause célèbre” for jihadists? One need only read the newspaper to conclude that Iraq is spawning more terrorists. (Indeed, one fears that all the authors of the NIE did was clip from the newspapers.)

If you’ve ever stood up to a bully, you know how this works. Confrontation tends to increase the chances of violence in the short term but decreases its likelihood in the long term. Any hunter will tell you that the most dangerous moment is when you’ve cornered an animal, and any cop will tell you that standing up to muggers puts you in danger. American colonists were less safe for standing up to King George III, and the United States was certainly safer in the short term when we stood on the sidelines while Germany was conquering Europe. Heck, we would have been safer in the short run if we’d responded to Pearl Harbor by telling the Japanese they could have the Pacific to themselves.

After 9/11, there were voices on the left warning that an attack on Afghanistan would only perpetuate the dreaded “cycle of violence.” Today, Democrats tout their support of that “good” war as proof they aren’t soft on terrorism. Fair enough, I suppose. But guess what? That war made us less safe too — if the measure of such things is “creating more terrorists.” A Gallup poll taken in nine Muslim nations in February 2002 found that more than three-fourths of respondents considered the liberation of Afghanistan unjustifiable. A mere 9% supported U.S. actions. That goes for famously moderate Turkey, where opposition to the U.S. ran three to one, and in Pakistan, where a mere one in 20 respondents took the American side.

In other words, before Iraq became the cause célèbre of jihadists, Afghanistan was. Does that mean we shouldn’t have toppled the Taliban?

Going back further, it’s conventional wisdom that we helped “create” Osama bin Laden, or his Taliban and mujahadin comrades, when we supported the Afghan resistance to the Soviet Union. So we shouldn’t have done that either?

Every serious analysis of the Islamic world today describes a genuine tectonic shift in a vast civilization, an upheaval that cuts across social, religious and demographic lines. This phenomenon dwarfs transient issues such as the Iraq war. Are we to believe that once-moderate and relatively secular Morocco is slipping toward extremism because we toppled Baathist Saddam Hussein? Do we believe that those mobs who burned Danish embassies in response to a cartoon wouldn’t have done so if only President Bush had gone for the 18th, 19th or 20th U.N. resolution on Iraq? Millions of young men yearning for meaning and craving outlets for their rage would have become computer programmers and dental hygienists if only Hussein’s statue still towered over central Baghdad? Would the Pope’s comments spark nothing but thoughtful and high-minded debate from the Arab street if only Al Gore or John Kerry were in office?

Iraq is the excuse du jour for jihadists. But the important factor is that these are young men looking for an excuse. If you live your life calculating that it’s a mistake to do anything that might prompt murderers and savages to act like murderers and savages, you’ve basically decided to live under their thumb and surrender your civilization in the process.

For me, the truly dismaying news this week didn’t come from the NIE but from the German media. A German opera house announced that it would cancel its staging of Mozart’s “Idomeneo” because Berlin police concluded that staging the opera — which includes a scene in which Jesus, Buddha, Poseidon and Muhammad are beheaded — would pose an “incalculable security risk” from jihadists. Germany, recall, proudly opposed the Iraq war — but still narrowly missed a Spain-style terrorist attack on its rail system this summer.

A leading Muslim spokesman in Germany explained that he was all for free speech, as long as it didn’t offend Muslims. The Germans’ all-too-typical appeasement of terrorism no doubt makes them “safer” and “creates” fewer terrorists.

And all it cost them — for now — is Mozart.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjYwM2Y1MGMwZDk2NWEwZWUxNmNiNTdkNTU0YWY5ZDU=

Democrats need to stop trying to talk out of every side of their mouths acoustic.

The biggest surge in terrorist recruitment occurred in the 1990's...when the United States wasn't fighting terrorists in Iraq or Afghanistan...or any place else.

posted September 30, 2006 03:44 AM            

quote:

---

As the Washington Post reports, Democrats made a lot of extraordinary claims about the NIE, which the report itself doesn't support:

---

It states plain as day that the Washington Post reported extraordinary claims from Democrats about the NIE that the NIE itself doesn't support. That is NOT a true statement. That is NOT a conclusion any rational person would get from reading the Washington Post article.

quote:

---

"Democrats made a lot of extraordinary claims about the NIE"...this is true.

---

Democrats said that the war in Iraq had not improved our position in the War on Terror, and had not made us safer. Bush tried to weasel out of it by claiming, "We didn't create terrorism by fighting terrorism." Bush's statement is NOT supported by the NIE.

I'd challenge you to show me a quote from a Democrat that is in response to the NIE that says anything about giving up in Iraq. The meaning behind most of the Democratic quotes are that the war in Iraq hasn't helped us become safer, hasn't helped our war on terror, and say that the NIE demonstrates that this administration is fundamentally flawed in it's belief that the Iraq war has been beneficial in the global war on terror. All of those statements are completely accurate based on the NIE.

[In response to your latest article] The NIE doesn't say we shouldn't have pursued the Iraq war, nor does it say we should quit it. It said that our interests would be best served if we beat the Iraq jihad. That's not the point, though. That's another of Republican's convenient diversions from what the topic is.