AP misrepresented newly released NIE judgment on Al Qaeda's use of "contacts and capabilities" in Iraq
In a June 17 article, the Associated Press misrepresented one of the key judgments of the newly released summary of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) titled "The Terrorist Threat to the Homeland."
The AP reported in its first sentence:
The terrorist network Al-Qaida will likely leverage its contacts and capabilities in Iraq to mount an attack on U.S. soil, according to a new National Intelligence Estimate on threats to the United States.
By contrast, the relevant section of the declassified key judgments in the NIE stated the following:
We assess that al-Qa'ida will continue to enhance its capabilities to attack the Homeland through greater cooperation with regional terrorist groups. Of note, we assess that al-Qa'ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa'ida in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the Homeland. In addition, we assess that its association with AQI helps al-Qa'ida to energize the broader Sunni extremist community, raise resources, and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks.
In contrast with the NIE, the lead of the AP article omitted the phrase "seek to" and asserted directly that "Al-Qaida will likely leverage its contacts and capabilities in Iraq to mount an attack on U.S. soil."
Further down in the article, the AP quoted the judgment correctly.
From the June 17 AP article:
The terrorist network Al-Qaida will likely leverage its contacts and capabilities in Iraq to mount an attack on U.S. soil, according to a new National Intelligence Estimate on threats to the United States.
[...]
The report makes clear that al-Qaida in Iraq, which has not yet posed a direct threat to U.S. soil, could become a problem here.
"Of note," the analysts said, "we assess that al-Qaida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the homeland."
This fails the logic test, anyway, as most of Bush's Iraq talking points. How would Al Qaeda in Iraq be more capable of attacking the U.S. Homeland than any other branches of Al Qaeda?
This is just more propaganda desperately trying to justify Bush's optional war. Actually, the most significant point of this report is that it shows that the war in Iraq has NOT weakened Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is NOT "too busy in Iraq" as some of our resident Bush apologists have claimed. In fact, it would appear that they have grown stronger BECAUSE of Bush's war crimes.
Thanks, President Numbnuts!
Great commentary. I am sorely suspicious of any national intelligence reports since 9-11. As far as I can discern, the same people manipulated 9-11 intelligence are still in position to do so. Lying to the american people to achieve a personal goal. History books will note a floating log was named after Bush, the U.S.S George W Bush.
maybe we should start to worry. it's coming up on bush's annual one month nap time.
What if he does not wake up? dick cheatme wouldn't have a "living corpse" to hide behind and he would exposed as the one "running the show" all this time. (only the brain dead does not know this). We have had a war on terror going on ever since the British came over to enforce taxes. This is NOT new, just an excuse to circumvent the constitution. baby bush and his ilk are getting on my nerves and am looking for them to ride off into the sunset of obscurity. I will NEVER use a baby bush postage stamp, I can assure you of that. A good image on "his" stamp would be a scabie or a louse, even a dust mite would be a better image than his face as it causes instant nausea for me. baby bush's freek show must go. Impeach them both.
MMFA's hanging its hat on the wrong argument (implied) with this one. Pointing out a mistatement that may end up being accurate will only give credence to the "fight them there rather than here" nonsense.
"Likely seek to" or "likely will" doesn't change the response. Either way, staying in Iraq isn't it. It sure hasn't stopped the al Qaeda leadership in Pakistan from becoming "stronger than ever" according to the NIE.
That's because Pakistan has done what the democrats are attempting to do in Iraq...leave.
Pakistan has pulled their military out of the al-qaeda infested territory and adopted a hands off strategy...allowing them to grow stronger.
Appeasement works every time...for your enemy.
I wouldn't call what Musharref did to the Taliban in the Red Mosque appeasement.
They tried to appease the situation in the Red Mosque...which only made it worse when they finally faced the problem.
- We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safe haven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas - NIE report
Feel free to educate yourself on the subject.
Bush rightly vowed to go after the terrorists and those who harbor them, but instead he pays Musharraf a billion dollars a year even though its clear Musharraf is unwilling or unable to send the army into the tribal areas. So really its Bush who is appeasing Al Qaeda. Meanwhile, thanks to Iraq more terrorists are recruited and trained, Iran is stronger and the world stands aghast.
It boggles the mind.
WESLEY:
You may be on to somethng. To not be engaged in ALL OUT WAR in every zone Al Qaeda has sprung up is tantamout to APPEASEMENT. Pakistan has done "what war opposition WANTS to do in Iraq" you cynically but emphatically charge.
It's either WAR, or it's APPEASEMENT. That's your formula, and it may be operative.
It doesn't seem to be Bush's game, however.
After 9/11, our intelligence made THIS assessment (and today's assessment is that Al Qaeda has equalled or bettered its capabilities held prior to 9/11):
WASHINGTON, Feb. 6, 2002 – Despite the progress in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda terror network remains the greatest danger confronting the United States, CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence."Al Qaeda can also exploit its presence or connections to other groups in such countries as Somalia, Yemen, Indonesia and the Philippines," Tenet said. U.S. officials estimate that Al Qaeda may have cells or infrastructure in more than 60 nations.
---------
So, WESLEY, by your OWN rubric, it seems President George W. Bush is APPEASING Al Qaeda in OVER 58 DIFFERENT NATIONS, while actually engaging them in only TWO.
58 APPEASMENTS, versus only TWO engagements ... that's the situation, according to the way you evaluate "threat" versus "action".
Do you REALLY wish to (1) show that BUSH is history's GREATEST APPEASER OF ALL TIME, or conversely, (2) do you advocate invasion and engagement in full scale war in 58 additional nations in addition to Afghanistan and Iraq?
THIS is what you hope to tell us, and it's frankly as crazy as a junkyard rat. Your "logic" in claiming "appeasement", defining it as the removal of full scale troop engagement, hits Bush tremendously hard, don't you think?
Is this truly the argument you wish to make?
Gee, Wes....isn't it too bad that we diverted our capabilities to Iraq instead of hunting down Bin Laden when we had the chance? With the bulk of our forces BOGGED DOWN in Bush's optional war, Bin Laden has been free to rebuild his organization. Great work, President Numbnuts!
Feel free to educate us, Wesley.
When's the last time we heard from Bin Laden again? He's probably already dead.
President Numbnuts can't let him be dead. They still need to trot him out from time to time to scare the 28% knuckledraggers when things in Iraq continue to slide into the toilet. Of course, they also can't let said knuckledraggers realize that Bin Laden isn't in Iraq. Then they might actually start to connect the dots and realize what an obscene waste the Iraq war has been. Not to worry, though, there's always Gay Marriage and Flag Burning to distract them.
he was heard from yesterday
the tape was old. He hasn't been heard from "live" in quite a long time now.
The same way Jesus is heard from today
Why are they trotting out the old tapes ? What point are they trying to make by showing his ugly face around. Is this the famous lets scare the crap out of uninformed americans trick ?
Of course the point is to scare the crap out of idiot Americans, -- so that they will continue to support the occupation of Iraq.
They probably chose old tapes to make sure that they don't include any clues to Osama's current whereabouts.
bush said he wasn't too concerned about bin laden anyway.
I think he is dead. There were news reports years ago in some Muslim newspapers that he die of natural causes.
Tony Snow just said they are still looking for him. Or should i call him Tony Snowjob ?
Well we have seen how well the lets get as many Americans killed as we can has worked. So the rights solution is to... keep doing it. Keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. Never works ANY time. Then again it does temporarily sate the endless bloodlust of warmongers. Thats ALL it has done so far.
I'm not seeing the distinction that MMFA is making. Seems to me the word "likely" is the key qualifier, not "seek to".
The difference lies in the capability. I seek to win the lottery, although I will not buy tickets. I have never yet won the lottery. Realistically, I have almost no expectation of winning the lottery.
About the same odds, in fact, that AIQ has of staffing and executing a strike in the USA over the next 24 months.
I think the operative word is "probably". In other words, it's a guess...or maybe they're just throwing a bone to President Numbnuts...he needs one about now.
mmfa doesn't disappoint with another myopic view of the terrorist threat to America.
While focusing on their juvenile wordsmithing...they fail to report the most obvious fact from the report..."Al-Qa'ida is and will remain the most serious threat to the homeland".
Yep, Al-Qa'ida is in Iraq...our soldiers are in Iraq...but Reid, Durbin, etal...determine that the best course is to get the hell out...beautiful.
Thats because MMFA isnt commenting on foriegn policya t all much less downplaying any terrorist threat, but pointing to media duplicity. Yes al Queda is in Iraq, but WE were there first so NOW they are in Iraq. The problem is they dont glow in the dark and seeking them out and getting THEM without excaberating the situation with more needless deaths of innocents isnt very likely. There is no reason in the world to leave off fighting al Queda because we leave Iraq. I get that you are in love with this false dichotomy but there isnt any reason to let your enemy choose the playing field. Iraq is the wrong playing field to fight this menace.
SOLON:
You are correct: Al Qaeda was NOT in Iraq at the time of Tenet's report given in my earlier post. Because of that, we can modify the "60 nations" in which Al Qaeda had/has operating cells to AT LEAST 61. Thanks for the reminder, and hey WESLEY ... this doens't help your argument ...
Wesley, educate us again...how does keeping our forces in Iraq make a domestic attack any less likely? I think I missed that part in the NIE...
Wesley I am really sick of your weak tripe. Go "f" yourself. You make no sense, your analysis is obviously someone else's that you simply regurgitate and people like you cling to an alternate reality. You don't answer critics who nail your opinions to the wall, like Tex above.
And I have a feeling you have a page a day calendar and today's word was "myopic." Good one buddy. People like yourself are a waste of time. I 'll simply ignore your posts from now on, I've run out of patience and civility for idiocy and arguing for arguments sake. Don't bother responding, I won't read it.
Wonderful self-analysis of your own psyche...and your perfectly appropriate cure...abstinence.
It works every time.
Why not just read your own posts. Then you'll be happy every time.
Lord have mercy, Leather...my side is killing me from laughing...perfect advice for a serene and uninformed life.
Serenity now...serenity now.
So now we can invade any country, and claim our right to stay there just because our presence invites terrorirsts organizations that were never there before.
Example: We invade Turkey tomorrow for no reason whatsoever. Al Qaeda, who was never in Turkey, gets heated, iniltrates Turkey and starts bombing Turkish cities. Democrats call for withdrawal. The CIA assesses that now Al Qaeda will try to attack us from Turkey, therefore our half-million troops must stay put in Turkey.
I hate these idiotic imperialists with their stupid reasoning who think they own the world.
We invaded Iraq to get rid of Saddam Hussein. We invade Afghanistant to get rid of the Taliban. The rest of the world we will fight Al Quaeda using various tactics.
grab your musket and lead the way ...............
Since when does the AP ever get anything right?
"will likely" implies a high probablity as opposed to "will probably seek".
"Will probably seek" is right up there with, "while smoking opium Al Qaeda will fantasize blowing up a cow in Wyoming."
Does anyone find it at all interesting that this scary report came out right after Chertoff had his gut feeling?
That this report came out just when there is going to be an all nighter at the Capitol Hill over a troop withdrawl issue.
Whatever happened to the duct tape, tuna and powdered milk?
Olbermann did a piece on such coincidences
The Nexus of Politics and TerrorWhen you hear the word "NIE", don't treated as a sacred truth-telling document.
Remember the 2002 NIE used to lie to the Americans in order to justify invading Iraq? George Tenet described this NIE as “one of the lowest moments of my seven-year tenure,". Bush and the neocons can force a falsehood-packed NIE on the CIA any time they want. Look at the timing too. There is a heated debate over Iraq withdrawal taking place in congress.
AP is here also continuing the conflation of AIQ and al Qaida. They are NOT the same, even though Bush and Co desperately wants it to be so.
Exactly. "Al Qaeda" in Iraq serves great propaganda purposes for Bin Ladin as well as our own President Numbnuts. Basically, anybody with a gun can call themselves "Al Qaeda". I notice in the news this morning that we've captured yet another "high level" Al Qaeda operative in Iraq. What a coincidence! Is it possible that some poor schlub in a jail cell just got an instant promotion this morning?
Educate us, Wesley.
"BAGHDAD - The U.S. command said Wednesday the highest-ranking Iraqi in the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq has been arrested, adding that information from him indicates the group's foreign-based leadership wields considerable influence over the Iraqi chapter."
[link to news.yahoo.com]
Wow! They couldn't have timed this one any better if they...um...made it up! Surely not! Our gummint wouldn't lie to us, would they?
It's amazing how the party of distrust in government will trust completely and without question a government that has proven itself to lie all the time, isn't it?
That's a good point. These are the same people who insist that the Federal Government is too incompetent to administer National Healthcare or Public Education.
...yet they are supposed to be able to protect our food supply, our ports, our economic interests and our national security interests. Republicans are right about one thing, when they are in charge the government can't be trusted.
Well they are right - the current federal government IS too incompetent to administer those things. :)
One thing for sure, we can guarantee we'll be in Iraq forever, now. I saw a new acronym in that article - AQI. If there's one thing that our government abhors, it's relinquishing an established acronym. Having an acronym allows for quick insertion into state-of-the-union speaches, press briefings, etc. It eases the perception of propaganda by seeming less repetitive than "Al Qaeda in Iraq", no matter how often it's repeated. And, of course, whenever it's used, those in the public who know its meaning will feel more like members of an elite "club" of insiders, helping unite the citizens.
Yep, Rove's been working overtime. He deserves a medal for this one. Two medals, if he breaks out AQP (Al Qaeda in Pakistan) before the end of the week.
I'm expecting Keyser Söze to pop up in Iraq any day now.
There is another major problem with the AP story. It says: "So-called "single issue" terrorist groups probably will attack here on a smaller scale. They include white supremacists, anarchists and animal rights groups, such as Animal Liberation Front."
The actual NIE estimate, however, simply said unnamed "single issue" terrorist groups. It did name any or specify their issues. AP, however, names specific issues and even a specific group (one never accused of an actual terrorist act, no less), just in case their audience doesn't recall the official enemies.