Experts: Unclassified Report ‘Pure Pablum,’ Hides Truth
EmailIntelligence analysts and the former White House counterterror official describe as "pure pablum" the unclassified version of the National Intelligence Estimate released today on terror threats to the United States. "Nothing in here is going to surprise anybody who’s been following this," said one senior U.S. intelligence official. "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. The 2006 version of the National Intelligence Estimate claimed U.S. efforts had "seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations." THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS Blotter Possible New Message From Osama Bin Laden Blotter Exclusive: Terror Commander: New Attack Will Dwarf Failed Bomb Plot Blotter Signal to Attack? Worries Over Latest al Qaeda Tape Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage. "That’s no longer the case in 2007, and you have to read between the lines to understand how we have lost ground," Clarke says. The current White House counterterrorism official, Fran Townsend, the assistant to the president for homeland security, told reporters today, "Al Qaeda is weaker today than if we had not taken strong action against them." She said she would not address still-classified aspects of the intelligence estimate that al Qaeda had regained strength at levels not seen since before the 9/ll attacks. The Blotter on ABCNews.com reported last week that senior law enforcement and intelligence officials had "multiple and credible" reports that an al Qaeda terror cell may be on its way to the United States or could already be in the country. Today’s report also concludes that "al-Qa’ida will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQI)." "Given that there was no al Qaeda in Iraq until we invaded there," says Clarke, "it’s hard not to draw the conclusion that going to Iraq has created a further threat to the United States." Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Ms. Townsend’s spin on the report signifies that little has changed regarding the US response to AQ. Massive errors in judgment concerning how to respond to the threat have and are still being made, experts who are willing to address AQ’s known capabilities are rarely seen on news programs, and AQ is being offered yet another opportunity to prove the US/west wrong – at the expense of the American people.
As some journalists and television personalities laugh at the threat posed by AQ and as too many Americans continue to underestimate what this group intends to do, AQ strengthens. We’re not ‘losing’ because we are stupid, we’re losing because no one has the courage to explain why so many people in the Middle East are angry with the US/west. We’re also losing because no one has devised a non-military, non-US government sponsored response to AQ.
Posted by: redcat | July 17, 2007, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm
Time to amp up the fear factor again… and how many millions did the US tax payers pay for this “report”?
Terrorists would like to attack and kill Americans… REALLY! who would have thunk it? Get ready for more ‘theater of the obvious’ where politicians and corporations will attempt to use this to their advantage.
Well I’m sure this “report” will be well received by the defense industry – and those that profit from them (financially and politically). Americans spend $650+ BILLION for “defense”, if we can’t feel safe on that kind of expenditure, maybe we need to totally re-evaluate how we’re spending our tax dollars.
Posted by: Gary | July 17, 2007, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
Only in America! …can an administration that through their actions and inactions have created countless numbers of more terrorists and potential terrorists – and then that same administration asks for all Americans trust in their efforts to eradicate terrorists?!?!?!
Why is incompetence and corruption so often rewarded in US politics?
Posted by: Gary | July 17, 2007, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
How can you possibly call this administration incompetent?
The goal of this administration had been to enrich the coffers of the very rich individuals and certain corporations and they have done that with high levels of competence.
Posted by: ntsc | July 17, 2007, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
CYA? LOL! nice.
Posted by: tev | July 17, 2007, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
I guess everyone has missed all of the news about the terrorist attacks that have been thwarted…..and no AQ in Iraq before we got there…ya, right….wake up…
Posted by: Scott | July 17, 2007, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm
Anyone who thinks al Qaeda was in Iraq before we invaded it has either been asleep for a VERY long time or been drinking White House Kool-Aid. Maybe both.
Posted by: Ernie | July 17, 2007, 3:15 pm 3:15 pm
Richard (liar) Clarke? Mr. “Nothing to worry about Al Qaeda”?
Moving on….
Posted by: Jack Moss | July 17, 2007, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm
Anyone who thinks we “caused” the terrorism escalating in the world today needs to take off their foil dome cones-clear their head-(I know it’s not easy because there has to be SOME brain activity there) – review recent history and blame the murdering fanatics who would hate to lose these hand ringing apologists who continue to run flak for their fanatic intent.
Posted by: Chas | July 17, 2007, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm
Since the 2006 report, the deal was struck between the Pakistani government and tribal leaders in western Pakistan that has allowed the new safe haven for Al Qaeda. The question is, When does that situation weigh heavier against our security than does the potential collapse/overthrow of the Pakistani government that could ensue from an attack by the U.S. in those regions of western Pakistan? Perhaps the scales weighing the two are now tipping towards attack?
Posted by: Tom, Baltimore USA | July 17, 2007, 3:47 pm 3:47 pm
Boy, even a year ago the doubters on this site were in the minority. It was mostly die hard Bushies and scared security moms– now look! Times sure are changing!
Posted by: antiup | July 17, 2007, 3:55 pm 3:55 pm
This is outrageously biased. “CYA”? You guys should be ashamed that you hold yourselves out as unbiased news people. You are just representatives of the Democrat party and anti-war activists.
Posted by: Dan | July 17, 2007, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm
You’ve truncated Mr. Clark’s quotes here gentlemen. It’s clear he’s referring to the absence of specific blame for AQ resurgence on Musharraf’s deal with tribal authorities in North Waziristan. This area along with eastern Iran are the only geographical spaces where AQ is not being actively pursued and engaged.
To attempt to suggest that AQ fighting us in Iraq is somehow our fault and not the strategic decision of a thinking enemy and that their strength in Iraq is entirely a function of our action or inaction is insulting to your reader’s intelligence. Though clearly some readers are “less than genius” here, it’s this kind of sensationalist reporting that prompts me to turn away from your news service and rely on independent analysts (blogs). Glad to see I’m still not missing much.
Posted by: Apologist | July 17, 2007, 3:59 pm 3:59 pm
Clarke’s quote is a clever misrepresentation. If he means core AQ pledged to bin Laden then there was no AQ in Iraq until Zarqawi pledged allegiance to bin Laden in 2004. But that is a very narrow definition and ignores AQ-inspired Sunni fanatics determined to wreak havoc on the US, Israel, Jordan, etc. They were clearly present in Iraq prior to March 2003, and their leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had already set in motion numerous attacks against the US including the Millennium plots and the assassination of a US diplomat in Jordan.
Posted by: dylan | July 17, 2007, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
Apologist – We generously created the holy battlefield in Iraq for AQ’s jihad by going to war in a country we had no reason nor justification to invade. Their recruitment is way up and is directly related to our actions or inactions in the Middle East. This administration has shown an appalling lack of understanding of the people and mentality there, a dangerous miscalculation. We waste our resources there. Al Qaeda is all over the world, which is where we should be fighting them. Amazing they haven’t caught bin Laden, huh?
Posted by: DaveM | July 17, 2007, 4:33 pm 4:33 pm
This so called “expert” in Mr. Ross’s report certainly thought there was a connection between Iraq and AlQeada when he defended Clinton’s bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum,Sudan.
Ross should have asked Clarke is this statement sounds familiar?
…”intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa’s current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts and the National Islamic Front in Sudan”.
That’s what Ross’s “expert” had to say in a Washington Post article dated January 23, 1999. Of course, the President had a (D) in front of his name at the time.
Posted by: Matt, St. Louis | July 17, 2007, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
Why is it that private analysts like Stratofr claim that AQ as a singularly directed entity is no more? AQ in Iraq is hardly any different than any other insurgent group there. Actually calling them AQ is a misnomer. I believe the private analysts before I believe anything from this administration.
Posted by: "ill"duce | July 17, 2007, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
This so called “expert” in Mr. Ross’s report certainly thought there was a connection between Iraq and AlQeada when he defended Clinton’s bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum,Sudan.
Ross should have asked Clarke is this statement sounds familiar?
…”intelligence exists linking bin Laden to El Shifa’s current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts and the National Islamic Front in Sudan”.
That’s what Ross’s “expert” had to say in a Washington Post article dated January 23, 1999. Of course, the President had a (D) in front of his name at the time.
Posted by: Matt | July 17, 2007, 4:48 pm 4:48 pm
Hey, isn’t George W. Bush “Tough on Terrorism”? as quoted by many sources?
Good thing he pulled us out of Afghanistan and left a power vacuum there again then wedged us in Iraq where we’ll be perpetually dealing with Shiites and Sunnis unyielding rivalry, along with creating a perfect magnet there for terrorists and even giving them all the recruiting resources THEY needed… Yeah, Bush has been really tough on Terrorism. Good thing.
Posted by: bushisafailure | July 17, 2007, 5:10 pm 5:10 pm
Since the end of WW2 we have adopted a policy of fighting our enemies to a border. Our enemies have never been confined to a border but the liberals and left leaning of this country would like to see the US fall, so we are confined to a border. In Vietnam, the border was Cambodia. With full knowledge that our enemy would cross the border kill our soldiers then run back for a safe haven, our leftists in the government made sure we couldn’t “legally” cross the border. Now we have the same thing going on again. The left is okay with terrorists killing our soldiers and then running across an imaginary line and then protecting those terrorists once they cross the imaginary line. This is what happens when we fight wars and allow our enemy a safe haven. Of course, the liberals want us to loose. They gain nothing and lose everything if we win.
Posted by: Shane | July 17, 2007, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm
I understand now.
BushCo rants about fighting
“them” in Iraq so “we” don’t have to fight them
“here”. Therefore, if they are “here”, WHY are all the troops “there”?
Posted by: Trout | July 17, 2007, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
RE ‘bushisafailure’
When did we pull out of Afghanistan?
Posted by: Dan | July 17, 2007, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
Did you mean “pabulum”.
Ironic isn’t it.
-duh
Posted by: DUH | July 17, 2007, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
Clarke once again babbling inanely.
Posted by: John Kantor | July 17, 2007, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
teflonnads,
Is there a direct correlation between Saddam’s Iraq and Al Qeada. Yep.
Just ask Clarke (at least…when it’s a democrat dropping the bombs).
Posted by: Matt | July 17, 2007, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
I fully agree with Tom of Baltimore. I cannot imagine a bigger moron running this country. He keeps talking about Iraq when the real danger is lurking out there in Pakistan. It’s high time we got out of Iraq and attacked Pakistan asap.
Posted by: pkm | July 17, 2007, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
You republicans reeling against the criticism better wake the hell up. This isn’t a party issue.. this is an American issue… and there is no way you can take the facts and defend this current administration. They have fouled up royally, and the sooner we all realize it, the sooner we can all move on to a better solution. Stop the partisan BS people… you are holding us ALL back!
Posted by: Troy Street | July 17, 2007, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
The Decider (or his policy-makers) chose to
invade Iraq before Afghanistan was cleaned up.
Now both Afghanistan and Pakistan are safe havens for terror groups, named and unnamed.
As a result, this region has enjoyed a record poppy crop, with a heroin supply that exceeds the demand. With so much available product, dealers are busy marketing this ‘new’ drug. It’s called “cheese” and it’s in our schools.
Posted by: Chip | July 17, 2007, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
Question for the white house:
Can you explain how the president’s policies of unconstitutional electronic eaves dropping and the jailing of people without due process HAS NOT curbed terrorists activity as evidenced in this report. Why hasn’t the casper milktoast media asked this question yet?
Posted by: chi | July 17, 2007, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm
chi, how do you know if terrorist activity has or has not been curbed?
Posted by: Jazz | July 18, 2007, 9:11 am 9:11 am
This is setting the stage, conditioning the morons in the American electorate to accept a false-flag attack perpetrated by the Bush administration in order to justify the imposition of martial law and the coming attack on Iran.
Robert
Posted by: Robert S. Finnegan | July 18, 2007, 10:46 am 10:46 am
Bush is an I-D-I-O-T.
Posted by: artist22 | July 18, 2007, 11:24 am 11:24 am
Fran Townsend shows what happened to the Stepford Wives: they were given White House jobs.
Posted by: FEO | July 18, 2007, 11:40 am 11:40 am
sometimes complicated issues have very simple solutions . Impeach bush and cheney , enough said.
Posted by: marcus lovell | July 18, 2007, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
“Security” is a powerful illusion that doesn’t exist in reality. I’m so tired of this BS. Bring on the Libertarians!
Posted by: Lana | July 25, 2007, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
Wow! Many of you need to get a job and quit watching Fahrenheit 9-11. Al-Qaeda is a threat and will continue to be a threat for many years to come. They are a world wide network, no matter what the US does, they will hate us. This is not a conspiracy theory; this is a dangerous threat to our existence as a free nation.
Posted by: King | August 2, 2007, 11:16 am 11:16 am
Will someone please get Richard Clarke a job and get him out of the way? Isn’t it amazing how the guy who once claimed to know nothing now knows everything. It is a shame he couldn’t convince his former “BOSS (BC)” to do something so clarke could be a real hero.
Personally I hope some of these so called “lame threats” never come through. I would hate for America to one day have to live as some other countries have had to live over the years. With the constant threat that they might be killed by a car bomb or worse if they leave their house. Let’s all hope and pray that day never comes. But let’s also be ready if it does.
Semper Fi
Posted by: Larry | August 5, 2007, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm