This report makes me believe that the leaked National Intelligence Estimate that is all the rage in the media and in the blogosphere has a hell of a lot more to do with rogue elements in the intelligence community meddling in politics than it has to do with the truth. Democrats have jumped all over it to use it for political purposes. The criticism from the Dems appears to be almost concurrent with the release of the media reports – awfully fast turnaround.
The report was completed in April and represented a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government, according to an intelligence official. The official, confirming accounts first published in Sunday's New York Times and Washington Post, spoke on condition of anonymity on Sunday because the report is classified.
"Unfortunately this report is just confirmation that the Bush administration's stay-the-course approach to the Iraq war has not just made the war more difficult and more deadly for our troops, but has also made the war on terror more dangerous for every American," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, head of the Democratic effort to take control of the House.
"It's time for a new direction in this country," Emanuel, D-Ill., said in the statement.
"Press reports say our nation's intelligence services have confirmed that President Bush's repeated missteps in Iraq and his stubborn refusal to change course have made America less safe," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. "No election-year White House PR campaign can hide this truth."
A White House spokesman, Blair Jones, said, "We don't comment on classified documents." But he said the published accounts' "characterization of the NIE is not representative of the complete document."
The White House issued a written rebuttal that argued administration officials have been making some of the same arguments as in the intelligence estimate. A White House strategy booklet released this month described the terrorists as more dispersed and less centralized and still a threat to the United States.
All criticism, no position. No solution, just attack. Another politically motivated leak from an intelligence community that appears to be more involved in domestic politics than in actually doing what it is paid to do.
Did this particular intelligence report mention anything al all about radical Islamic Jihadist having anything to do with the cause behind more terrorism.
Just listened to Clinton’s interview and I am stuck by the notion that the current Democrat potiticians are not learning from Clinton’s experience in fighting Islamic Jihadism. Clinton presents the case that he did everything in his power, except actually authorize force, to stop Islamic Jihadists yet for some odd reason when Islamic Jihadists begin fighting in Iraq Democrats are insisting we change course, that it’s all a failure, a waste etc.
It appears that Reid’s statement contradicts Clinton’s belief about waging war against Islamic Jihadism where ever it exists.
If it is true that Islamic Jihadism is growing in Iraq does not this justify our resolve to continue fighting. I think Clinton’s experience in Somalia, Yeman have proven we must continue the fight in Iraq.
It’s difficult to keep up with all the conflicting information coming out of the intelligence community these days. Is this the report written by by Valerie Plame, or the one written by Joe Wilson, or did Richard Clark write it, or is Jamie Gorelick at it again?
Ever since Bill Clinton cut the budgets and fired most of the experienced folks at CIA and FBI, and then put in his political appointees to run the agencies, there has been little in the way of intelligence and nothing but politics coming out of those places.
The record of lies and distortions, oversights and outright incompetence is so thick with example after example, I don’t know why anyone would take their reports as anything but obvious anti-Bush propaganda. If I was George Bush, I wouldn’t take anything the CIA said at face value, nothing.