Let Americans See the National Intelligence Estimate

[BlingBling]

Yesterday, Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV), the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, called for the declassification of the recently-disclosed National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which concluded "the Iraq war has fueled the growth of Islamic extremism and terror groups." Declassification is not without precedent. In July 2004, the CIA declassified portions of the October 2002 NIE that laid out the case for Iraq's purported weapons of destruction program. In a letter addressed to the Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, Rockefeller asked for declassification -- "to the fullest extent possible" -- of the key judgments of the April 2006 NIE. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, seconded the call. “I think the administration should declassify this document so the American people can see the material for themselves and come to their own conclusions,” he said in a statement. The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board offers the same advice: "So here's our suggestion for President Bush: Declassify the entire NIE." The report's conclusions, the consensus findings of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, reach the same judgment made by terrorism experts across the political spectrum, according to a Center for American Progress/Foreign Policy Magazine survey. Asked whether the Iraq war was having a negative impact on national security, 87 percent of the experts agreed.

[Luke_Wilbur]

Well you got your wish BlingBling. But, I don't understand why

 

***************************************8

 

Press Briefing by Homeland Security Advisor Frances Fragos Townsend

 

MS. TOWNSEND: Good evening, everybody. Given the leak this weekend of classified information regarding the National Intelligence Estimate dated April 2006 and entitled "Trends and Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States," the President ordered Ambassador Negroponte, the Director of National Intelligence to declassify the text of the key judgment section of that report to the extent consistent with national security interests. And as he said today, in an effort to stop the speculation about what was in the key judgments.

 

The now declassified -- the declassified key judgments are now available to the press and the public on the DNI website, www.odni.gov. Let me be clear that, you know, with every unauthorized disclosure of classified information it does harm to our national and homeland security. Every leak is a victory for our enemies who plot to kill us, because we tell them something about our knowledge, our intelligence capability and our perspective on their capability.

 

I should be clear that you, by and large, have the text of the key judgments. All decisions on declassification were made by the office of the DNI. All of the portions related to the key judgments on Iraq, you have. I should tell you that there is probably just a handful, maybe two or three paragraphs that have been redacted in the interest of national security. And to the extent to have questions regarding those decisions, I would direct you to the DNI's office.

 

Let me just briefly walk you through the key judgments. As you know, it opens by acknowledging that the United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al Qaeda and disrupted its operations. However, we judge that al Qaeda will continue to pose the greatest threat to the homeland and U.S. interests abroad by a single terrorist organization.

 

It goes on to talk about networks and cells that are spreading and adapting to our counterterrorism efforts, as well as further down that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy and is becoming more diffuse.

 

As you know, the President's newly released National Strategy for Counterterrorism, on page four of that, does reference this point, remarking that the terrorists today are more dispersed and less centralized. The President, in his speech on September 5th, noted that the terrorist threat is more dispersed and self-directed.

 

The key judgments go on to remark that greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority nations would alleviate some of the grievances the jihadists exploit, and that over time such progress, together with sustained, multi-faceted programs targeting the vulnerabilities of jihadist movements and continued pressure on al Qaeda could erode support for the jihadists.

 

The President has frequently made the point that freedom is the antidote to terror. He's done that on numerous occasions, and as you know, that really is the key point in the National Security Strategy, on pages nine to 11, of our long-term strategy to combat terror.

 

The key judgments go on to say that we assess the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in importance to U.S. counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad, but also here at home. Again, the President talked about the threat from home-grown cells in his speech on September 5th, and acknowledged their responsibility for attacks and planning in both Madrid and Canada.

 

Now in the next section -- this is the Iraq section in the key judgments, where the key judgments note, "Perceived jihadist success would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere." The key judgments goes on to say that "the Iraq conflict has become a cause c l bre for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world, and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement." It then says, "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves and be perceived to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

 

This really underscores the President's point about the importance of our winning in Iraq. On September 5th, the President, in his speech, said, "Iraq is not a distraction from their war on America, it is the central battlefield, where the outcome of this struggle will be decided." We've heard the President say that repeatedly. Also, in the National Security Strategy for Combating Terrorism, on page four, in the challenges section, we make the point that the ongoing fight for freedom in Iraq has been twisted by terrorist propaganda as a rallying cry.

 

And then later on in the strategy we make the point -- in the section on safe havens, on page 16 -- that terrorists see Iraq as the central front in the fight against the United States, and this is why, in helping the Afghan and Iraqi peoples forge effective democracies is vital.

 

The key judgments go on to talk about the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement, and that those factors outweigh its vulnerabilities. It goes on to enumerate both the four underlying factors of fueling -- those are entrenched grievances such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, which lead to anger, humiliation, a sense of powerlessness; second, Iraq jihad; third, the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and, fourth, pervasive anti-U.S. sentiment among most Muslims, all of which jihadists exploit.

 

On the vulnerability side, it goes on at some length that the jihadist movement, if these vulnerabilities are fully exposed and exploited, could slow the spread of the movement. And they include dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of jihadists' radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens. It notes the jihadists' greatest vulnerability is their ultimate political solution, which is an ultra-conservative interpretation of the sharia-based governance spanning the Muslim world.

 

It is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims. It notes recent condemnations of violence in extremist religious interpretations by a few notable clerics, signal a trend that could facilitate the growth of a constructive alternative to the jihadist ideology, notably peaceful political activism. And that, in this way, the Muslim mainstream emerges as the most powerful weapon in the war on terror.

 

The key judgments also note the importance of our allies around the world. And says that countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorists.

 

We've heard the President speak to this issue on a number of occasions. Not only is that noted in the National Security Strategy for Combating Terrorism, it is also noted in numerous speeches of the President, noting our important allies in the war on terror, both in Western Europe, our British colleagues, but also in the Muslim world, in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

 

The next section of the key judgments really speaks to the role of the Zarqawi network in exploiting the situation in Iraq. I would note for you that because this is published in April of 2006, it does not include any reference to the fact that he has been killed. In fact, at one point it notes should Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global threat. That's obviously no longer a problem that they would have anticipated.

 

I would say, following along in the key judgments, the key

 

judgments note that the increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al Qaeda in Iraq might lead to veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations. Obviously, the President has noted concern about this, and we take efforts both at home and abroad to defeat the extremists.

 

Going further along in the key judgments, there is a note that fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing the tactics that they use. I would say to you, as we've said before, this is not any different from any other conflict. People with fighting experience will take that experience and use it in the future.

 

The fact is, they were fighting us long before we were in Iraq, we've made that point, and they were using their experience in prior conflicts. They will continue to do that, which is why it's very important for us to fight against them. Shrinking away from them, withdrawing from the conflict will not alleviate this problem.

 

The key judgments then go on to note that the radicalization process is occurring more quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age. I would note for you that we speak to this in the new National Security Combating Terrorism strategy, and talk about the importance of taking aggressive efforts against cyber safe havens. That is also, as you continue on in the key judgments, it talks about the groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to communicate, propagandize, recruit, train and obtain logistical and financial support. And, again, as I've mentioned, we do address that in the National Security Strategy for Combating Terrorism.

[Guest human_*]

This is just the democrats playing politics. In the atmosphere before 9/11? The democrats where more concerned about civil rights then national security.

 

They used civil rights as a political weapon, and in Latin America? Clinton and the democrats never had the ball to begin with.

 

 

BlingBling if you want to play fantasy politics? then be my guest. BlingBling; I will not respond to you any further because you know not of what you type about.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yesterday, Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV), the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, called for the declassification of the recently-disclosed National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which concluded "the Iraq war has fueled the growth of Islamic extremism and terror groups." Declassification is not without precedent. In July 2004, the CIA declassified portions of the October 2002 NIE that laid out the case for Iraq's purported weapons of destruction program. In a letter addressed to the Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte, Rockefeller asked for declassification -- "to the fullest extent possible" -- of the key judgments of the April 2006 NIE. Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, seconded the call. “I think the administration should declassify this document so the American people can see the material for themselves and come to their own conclusions,” he said in a statement. The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board offers the same advice: "So here's our suggestion for President Bush: Declassify the entire NIE." The report's conclusions, the consensus findings of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, reach the same judgment made by terrorism experts across the political spectrum, according to a Center for American Progress/Foreign Policy Magazine survey. Asked whether the Iraq war was having a negative impact on national security, 87 percent of the experts agreed.

[BlingBling]

This is just the democrats playing politics. In the atmosphere before 9/11? The democrats where more concerned about civil rights then national security.

 

They used civil rights as a political weapon, and in Latin America? Clinton and the democrats never had the ball to begin with.

 

 

BlingBling if you want to play fantasy politics? then be my guest. BlingBling; I will not respond to you any further because you know not of what you type about.

 

You crack me up!. Its funny how people in your own party agreed to having it released. I wonder why?

 

Republicans are trying to cover it up. The administration is selectively declassifying portions of the report to muddy the waters and the right-wing propaganda machine is in damage-control mode. There's even a second briefing that they still refuse to discuss.

 

So as the Republican congress tried to skip town, our Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, went on the offense. She and her Democratic colleagues offered a motion to send the House into secret session to go over the full report in detail to get to the bottom of it.

 

But the Republicans wouldn't let it happen. Their "no" votes are the starkest admission yet that they just don't want to know what's really happening on the ground in Iraq, in Afghanistan, or anywhere else.

 

Leader Pelosi said that enough is enough -- and that when Democrats take back the House we will hold this administration accountable for making us less safe.