Comments (22)

Hoppy wrote on July 17, 2007 11:29 AM:

Isn't it wonderful how we always seem to hear about just how really, really bad, and really, really effective "al Qaeda" is, just when things look the bleakest for our esteemed president? Truly, the president commands God to do his will?

Equal Opportunity wrote on July 17, 2007 11:36 AM:

Could somebody please request a NIE on the bush administration?

I'd like to compare the effects of cheney/bush with the effects of other terrorist entities.

laura wrote on July 17, 2007 11:38 AM:

What the heck? If you read between the lines, or play it backwards, does it read "stay the course"?

security code: "pull", as in pull this and the curtain falls down

lampwick wrote on July 17, 2007 11:49 AM:

If we have enough solid evidence to make broad-brush claims like these about the presence of al-Qaeda in "the Homeland" (the country formerly known as the United States), then we also have enough evidence to track down these cells and haul them in. If we don't have enough evidence to track down these cells and haul them in, then I doubt we have enough evidence to make such broad and sweeping claims.

In other words, if these claims are accurate, then we're safe; and if they're wildly exaggerated, we're also safe. Which means that this report is nothing but state-sponsored alarmism.

TheraP" wrote on July 17, 2007 11:58 AM:

"state sponsored alarmism"

Thank you, lampwick!

Dr. Wu wrote on July 17, 2007 12:28 PM:

Could somebody please request a NIE on the bush administration?

"very low"

steve wrote on July 17, 2007 12:40 PM:

Someone has composed a NIE on the Unites States under the current administration and it is a doozy. See Chalmers Johnson's work on this, especially his latest book "Nemesis." He is on the mark and it is not pretty.

Phatman wrote on July 17, 2007 12:43 PM:

The real threat is a nuclear Pakistan being controlled by Islamic fanatics. Does the NIE cover the deteriorating situation in Pakistan?

John Dahodi wrote on July 17, 2007 12:45 PM:

Bush and his cronies are worrying too much when they can see the reading on the wall that their botched Iraq war is loosing stim and they are going to be exposed naked in the coming months. To save their skin, they are planning daily "Al Qaida" cry loud and loud and creating fear in the minds of timid Americans so they can once again fooled them and keep their presence in the coming election. Americans and the world has to prepare to get more stories about the Ala Qaida and BIN lADEN UNTILL THE ELCTION OF THE 2008 IS OVER.

gcs wrote on July 17, 2007 1:25 PM:

Won't someone - ANYONE FOR CHRISSAKES - in the MSM ask one simple, logical question. Which is -

How is it possible for us to be simultaenously "winning" in Iraq while facing an increased danger from the very enemy we claim to be defeating?

Someone? Anyone want to earn their journalism degree and call these bastards on their lies? Anyone got a pair?

Redshift wrote on July 17, 2007 1:36 PM:

Is there any way to read this other than that the Bush Administration has failed in the "War on Terror"? The appropriate response any time they engage in scare talk about terrorists hitting us here at home should be "since you're admitting that your strategy against al-Qaeda has failed, what are you going to do differently? And if they can 'follow us home' now, how has invading Iraq been anything other than a diversion of our resources from the real threat?"

Anonymous wrote on July 17, 2007 1:42 PM:

noted above:

"For the first time, U.S. intelligence formally assesses that al-Qaeda possesses 'safehaven in the Pakistani Federal Administered Tribal Areas.'"

in the news recently:

"The United States plans to pour $750 million in aid into Pakistan's tribal areas over the next five years as part of a "hearts and minds" campaign to win over the lawless region from Al Qaeda and Taliban militants.

But even before the plan has been fully carried out, documents and officials involved in the planning are warning of the dangers of distributing so much money in an area so hostile that oversight is impossible, even by Pakistan's own government, which faces rising threats from Islamic militants."

does that seem like a good plan?

dee illuminati wrote on July 17, 2007 2:02 PM:

* al-Qaeda will try to "leverage the contacts and capabilities" of al-Qaeda in Iraq to "enhance its capabilities" for striking the Homeland. al-Qaeda in Iraq also helps al-Qaeda "energize the broader Sunni extremist community."

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/larson_what_dogs_hear.jpg

What english speaking arabs hear

* The-database will try to "leverage the contacts and capabilities" of the-database in Iraq to "enhance its capabilities" for striking the Homeland. The-database in Iraq also helps the-database "energize the broader Sunni extremist community."

What arabs hear:

* The-database blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blahblah blahblah blah the-database blah blah Iraq blah blahblah blahblah blahblah blahblah blahblah blah. The-database blah blah Iraq blah blahblah blah the-database blah blahblah blahblah blahblah blah.

SPENCER ADAMS wrote on July 17, 2007 2:03 PM:

I'd like to know what the Admin left out of the NIE (deja vu?); so would Richard Clarke:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/07/experts-unclass.html
"It's more about what it doesn't say than what it does say," says Richard Clarke, the former White House official who is now an ABC News consultant.

Read the Declassified National Intelligence Estimate

"What is left out of the version released publicly is the explicit statement that al Qaeda is back and has operations underway," Clarke says.

parrot wrote on July 17, 2007 2:14 PM:

One wonders if on that last point if the Bushites aren't considering Gitmoizing our judicial and police appartus...you know, "just to be safe".

Kurt wrote on July 17, 2007 2:23 PM:

Has anyone read the full report? Are there dissenting opinions hidden in the footnotes like the NIE of October 2002? (The one that Ms. Rice did not read)

Dexter wrote on July 17, 2007 3:42 PM:

we should watch to make sure that the definition of "Homeland" doesn't shift from meaning "US of A" to "locations where there are American interests"

TheraP wrote on July 17, 2007 4:19 PM:

Thank you gcs @ 1:25.

You have so succinctly put into words exactly what is sitting in my gut.

I too hope that one day such a question will be asked.

And then, I "wish upon a star" - for it to be really and honestly addressed in an answer.

TheraP wrote on July 17, 2007 4:34 PM:

It's interesting how paranoid we've had to become, parsing every little word and phrase, concerned about what's "left out" and "secret" and so on.

It's a scary situation indeed, when we're more scared of our own government (and its motives) than we are of an enemy. Yes, it is the enemy within - rather than the enemy without - that poses the greatest danger to our freedoms.

And we're not out of the woods yet! (NIE - vis a vis cheney/bush and the danger to the US Constitution, please)

After all, what good is a "Homeland" if it's minus our Constitutional protections?

Meyer_Lansky wrote on July 17, 2007 9:24 PM:

Can't wait to hear Lieberman talk about this report by saying, "This NIE shows that we have the enemy on the run, the enemy reads the NIE and knows we are in hot pursuit, they are attacking us in Iraq out of desperation."

Meyer_Lansky wrote on July 17, 2007 9:25 PM:

Can't wait to hear Lieberman talk about this report by saying, "This NIE shows that we have the enemy on the run, the enemy has read the NIE and knows we are in hot pursuit, they are attacking us in Iraq out of desperation."

Meyer_Lansky wrote on July 17, 2007 9:25 PM:

Can't wait to hear Lieberman talk about this report by saying, "This NIE shows that we have the enemy on the run, they are attacking us in Iraq out of desperation."